As you might have gathered, I voted for Brexit. So too did my wife, a card carrying lifelong member of the Labour Party. And at the start of the process I had some faith that the political class would, as they promised, deliver on the result. But it is now clear that together with the media establishment, the Civil Service elites, big business and academia there has been a deliberate, and I fear, successful attempt to block the will of the people.
First they insulted us, My wife, who is of Indian origin, has not dared to ‘fess up to her friends (academics) that she voted to leave. For in such circles describing leavers as stupid or racist is just a given, it is routine and unchallenged. And the insults include the suggestion that we the 52% did not know what we were voting for so would need to vote again. Perhaps if the remainers in charge of Brexit, the loathsome Mrs May and her henchman Olly Robbins, made enough of a mess of the process (which they have duly done) we would realise it was better to stay in.
All the time our leaders have insisted that they respect the vote. And that No deal is better than a bad deal. Except they were lying. I am now resigned to the elites winning and the will of the people being denied. I did think that I would get angry, grab a yellow jacket and go protest. But I shall not. I just give up.
Among the elites voting on this farce is a woman, the Labour MP for Peterborough who has spent just a few weeks in prison for perverting the course of justice and who now wears an ankle tag. This lying criminal earns £77,000 a year plus expenses and gets to decide my future? My despair grows.
Britain is rotting from the head down. Like more and more of my fellow citizens, I despair at the greed , the mendacity and the patronising sense of superiority at once respected institutions such as Parliament or the BBC and am revolted that they are funded by me, the hard working taxpayer. Why the bloody hell should I pay £77,000 a year for a convicted criminal MP or £15,000 a week for Fiona bloody Bruce to host Question Time, a platform for more of the elitists to patronise me?
In politics, business, the media corruption is just a way of life in 2019. Academics teach a curriculum which would make Orwell proud. On every sort of issue it is them (the elite) versus us. Returning ISIS brides – 99% of the population say no but the elites know better. Transgender sex education for 4 year olds? No-one in their right minds supports this but the elites know better and anyone who dares speak out is a bigot. Over in the US the same liberal elites are forcing through rules allowing abortion up to birth. Naturally nearly everyone else thinks this is an abomination but we the people are powerless.
I can’t see any way that I can change that so, I suspect like m any, my reaction is just to turn off the TV, to pay as little tax a possible and to pretend it is not happening. I give up on this country and, indeed, on the West in general.
And they are off… the first Democrat to throw their hat into the ring as a potential Presidential candidate for 2020 is Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. As an out and proud deplorable I can think of few, bar crooked Hillary herself who is – quite amazingly - considering a run herself, I’d rather see the Dems select. Pocohontas is everything that is wrong with the Democrat party.
Senator Warren has managed to advance her career in law, academia and politics from the GetGo by claiming that she was of Native American descent despite the fact that she looked whiter than the driven snow. Suspecting this claimed ethnicity was just plain horse, Donald Trump taunted Ms Warren by calling her Pocohontas.
The humourless left, goaded by Warren herself, branded this “racist.” Of course it was not, it was a joke not about native Americans but about Ms Warren, but "racist" is how the left brand all conservatives whatever they say or think. This is particularly the case when they are trying to deflect attention from a legitimate charge. This is the way of “circling the wagons” as they used to say out West when Senator’s Warren’s forebears rode in on horses whooping and shooting.
Finally Warren took a DNA test and was proud to announce that she is 1/1024 Native American. Most Americans have far more Native American blood in them than the wannabee President. As someone who is 1/32 Swiss, Pocohontas suddenly makes, me want to take up yodelling, cross country skiing, read the Heidi books all over again and demand my share of the Nazi gold. Of course, I do not claim to be Swiss. Actually I think I might be 1/64th Swiss, but what does it matter? In Pocohontas terms, I was born with a Toblerone bar in my right hand and an Alpine horn in my left.
Warren’s claims to Native American ancestry are shown to be an almost total lie. Yet she has used them for decades to enrich herself through career advancement and to virtue signal as she, an ethnic, found it easier to identify with other ethnic minorities as victims and to slate those godawful racist conservatives. How could we argue on anything with the ultimate victim, a woman who more or less grew up in a wigwam? Were it not for the European genocide of her folks, Ms Warren would still today be riding the plains hunting buffalo.
Warren’s corruption, dishonesty and wretched virtue signalling is everything that is wrong with the modern Democrat Party and which, outside the Godless liberal coastal Cities which share such “values” makes it unelectable.
In that vein, Pocohontas would be a totally suitable person to fly the Democratic flag in 2020 a woman utterly in line with the values of her party today. And, as a supporter of the other side, if we are not to see the dream candidate for the blues, the crooked one herself, Warren would be pretty much the next best thing. Come on Dems you know it makes sense:
Warren for Big White House Chief, Pocohontas for President!
Jobs or Mobs. that is America's choice on November 6 and for their own sake I hope they vote for jobs and that means for the GOP. It is the booming economy which sees Donald Trump's personal approval rating at 50%, far higher than Obama's rating two years in. And it is why Trump's approval rating among black voters hit 40% this week, the highest for a GOP leader in more than sixty years. Boy how do the liberals in Hollywood with their narrative of Trump the racist explain that one? Anyhow, enjoy the video.
Here we go again. Once again a big multinational has buckled to a handful of compliants and desperate not to be seen as racist, sexist or homophobic has had to make a major strategy change. This ritual capitulation by evil capitalists to a small mob of semi-professional grievance merchants is now an almost weekly occurrence. The victim here is Kimberley-Clark,, the owner of Kleenex which for 60 years has made “Man Sized” tissues.
A spokesperson for KC said “"It was launched at a time when large cotton handkerchiefs were still very popular and Kleenex offered a unique disposable alternative. Despite that our consumer service is registering consistent increase of complaints on gender concern related to Mansize sub-brand.
Kimberly-Clark in no way suggests that being both soft and strong is an exclusively masculine trait, nor do we believe that the Mansize branding suggests or endorses gender inequality. Our Mansize tissues remain one of our most popular products, with 3.4 million people buying these tissues every year.
Nevertheless, as we remain committed to developing the best possible products for our consumers and take any feedback extremely seriously, we decided to renovate our current product and update the product sub-brand as Kleenex Extra Large."
Whatever. Is this still not both size-ist and racist. The implication that small entities are not as much up to the task as large ones is offensive while the fact that these issues which clean up dirt are white while dirt is coloured is clearly racist and offensive. How is my poor wife who is both very small and also of Indian origin and thus brown (am I allowed to use that word in today’s virtue signalling minefield?) meant to feel about Kleenex Extra Large? Surely she and millions of others feel alienated and offended?
Of course they do not. And whilst a vocal minority who seek offence and victim status may have bleated about the sexist tissues the numbers will have been tiny compared to those who carried on buying happily. Yet week big business yet again buckles. Pathetic but sadly just something that happens more and more.
Can you spot a man in the photo below? That is to say a chap with a penis who does not have periods which disrupt his training, who has more testosterone than a woman. If you can, then you are a total bigot and should be had up for a hate crime at once because the man in the centre may have a penis, etc but says he identifies as a transgender woman so he is a woman. Got it? Not only is the man, Rachel McKinnon, now a woman but he is also the women's world cycling champion in the 35-40 category. Well done to him.
This is, of course, sheer madness. The women who finished second, third and fourth have all been deprived of their rightful medals.They have been robbed by a world gone mad. McKinnon is a liberal arts college professor in the US and a Canadian - two things which mark him out as likely to be infected with a hotch potch of crackpot but fashionable ideas. No down Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is at this moment recording a celebratory dance to tweet out to his countryman in praise of his achievements.
McKinnon has responded to past criticism that he is a man robbing women by saying that trying to exclude transgender athletes is akin to the actions of those who were excluding black folks from sport in the past. You see if you object to Mr McKinnon robbing female athletes you are not only transphobic but probably racist as well.
Mr Mckinnon's supporters are, as you can see below, vocal. Academic Rachel Anne Williams is a "trans-philosopher" and is soon to author a book "Transgressive: A Trans Woman on Gender, Feminism and Politics". Hmm, I must remember to order that in as a Christmas present to myself. Ms Williams ( sorry is Ms a sexist term, should it be Mx or something) points out how hard Mr McKinnon has trained seemingly oblivious to the fact that so have all the real women who were robbed of medals.
What is the end point of this lunacy? If we get to the stage where fairly ordinary male athletes identify as women and sweep the board at the Olympics will someone note that this is just plain unfair on those who were born female? Do we have to get to that point before folks dare to be termed transphobic and, on utterly spurious grounds, racist and object to what is patent insanity?
Do not get me wrong. After the battles of the last few weeks I am delighted that Brett Kavanaugh has been appointed to the Supreme Court. Quite simply the Democratic Party tried to subvert the constitution with a hit job, an orchestrated smear. A good man fought back and, eventually the lack of tangible evidence and gaping holes in the testimony of the accusers meant that the Senate had to ratify. For that, and the tears of a mob of pathetic snowflakes, D list celebs, angry and snarling feminists and others with full blown #TrumpDerangementSyndrome, gives me great joy this weekend. However…
Donald Trump thought Kavanaugh would get onto the Court because he is, though a conservative, a moderate conservative. He will not row back on Roe vs Wade meaning that hundreds of thousands of babies a year will continue to be murdered each year as a form of birth control. There are other issues that mark him out as more of a Country Club Republican (he was after all supported very aggressively by former President Bush) than as someone with “deplorable” tendencies. So Trump thought Kavanaugh would be approved without too much fuss.
The lesson from this is that the Democrats see themselves as “the resistance”
And so unhinged have they become that they now oppose everything Trump does or says. Thus even when he has a major triumph where the blessed Obama failed (such as in Korea), the Dems insist that POTUS has it all wrong. If Trump says black is black, the Dems will not only insist that it is in fact white but rush to appear on CNN and the BBC to denounce The Donald for making such a blatantly racist statement.
The Dems would have fought whoever Trump nominated to the Supreme Court. The lesson from that is clear. Next time pick a black woman who should be immune to the normal Dem smears although not doubt they will find new ones. But more importantly if there is going to be a fight let’s fight for a Justice, who really will help Make America Great Again. Stick it to the Dems. There is no point trying to go half way with Swamp dwelling monsters like Senator Dianne Frankenstein, so get a qualified black female judge who is unreservedly pro life and pro family lined up for the next time there is a vacancy.
I enjoyed two minor celeb twitter exchanges yesterday. First up was Paula Jones who was sexually harassed by the rapist Bill Clinton. When she flagged this up Hillary Clinton did not say that all women complaining of this should be taken seriously. Instead Clinton attack dog spokesman James Carville suggested that Jones was trailer park trash. Jones’ testimony was far more powerful than that of Christine Blasey Ford but #Metoo has double standards when it comes to dealing with conservatives and liberals Stateside. Anyhow Jones is a star. And she is a real victim. Next up was Bonnie Greer who being black and female may be seen by some as a more natural victim but as a playwright and media luvvie living in London is very much of the metropolitan elite.
The subject of our exchange was a clip circulating widely on twitter of the journalist Rod Liddle appearing on Question Time last week. Liddle is a lifelong Labour supporter but disagrees with almost everything that the party stands for today. There is nothing that the left hates more than someone perceived as being a traitor to the cause. And thus Liddle is detested and usually described by lefties as a racist, sexist, homophobe and every other insult going. They hate him.
When one goes to Church, not that many on the Godless left will understand this comparison, one mumbles words from a sheet you have no need to read as they have been drummed into you by years of attendance. We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. Etc, etc. I imagine that when Lefties meet up they mumble a similar creed. We believe that Rod Liddle is a racist, sexist traitor to the cause. Richard Littlejohn should be sent to Venezuela for re-education too. Donald Trump is the worst President in history. I hate Thatcher. Etc etc.
On Question Time, Liddle was stating what were undeniable facts and they strike at the heart of why the leadership of the left, not just in Britain, but across the West have become detached from what was their core base – the working class. Before Bonnie pipes up not the white working class just the working class. Hence UKIP, Brexit, Trump, Le Pen all garnering massive support from folks who in years gone by would have voted the “right way.”
But Greer does not wish to hear about this tweeting
A basic axiom: Life is too short to spend time on #RodLiddle
With a link to the clip. When I suggested that this was playing the man not the ball, i.e. refusing to address the valid points Liddle made she tweeted (to numerous RTs from fawning admirers including the Mrs of Alistair “45 minutes dodgy dossier for the war criminal Blair” Campbell)
I don't know. I didn't listen to it, @TomWinnifrith A general principle of mine. Have held it for years. It's called: #LifeIsTooShortToWasteOnRodLiddle 👍 #RodLiddle
Hmmm. The thing is that if you have not listened to what Mr Liddle says how can you be so sure that he is always wrong? I find that reading the Guardian now and again or listening to Today on BBC radio 4 or watching Channel 4 Fake News is instructive, as well as infuriating, in that it challenges my core beliefs. Just now and again I adjust what I think in light of new evidence presented by the dark forces of socialism. But at least I am forced to think.
Folks like American born Greer do not want to think she knows that she is always on the “right side” of everything even if vast numbers of “little people” disagree with her and her chums. She is happy living in a bubble of privilege talking only to like minded folks who, like her, vote Democrat, loathe Brexit and back the left in Britain. And that is why she has missed some of the really good material produced in recent years by Rod Liddle explaining why the working class is so pissed off with the leadership of the left.
As long as folks like Greer refuse to listen to those raising such issues, the left won’t change. It will carry on screaching about Russian meddling in elections, engaging in #MeToo hysteria and banging on about identity politics while ignoring the complete sense of alienation and economic disempowerment felt by large swathes of society. And thus the left will keep losing – unless it is up against someone to whom it cannot lose such as a Nazi (Le Pen) or a wretched joke (May). I cannot say that the left losing all future elections would bother me greatly but I can't help but thinking that having such a closed mind is not terribly healthy.
The debate on free speech and a willingness to listen to alternative viewpoints or indeed to allow others to listen to them is a fascinating one in these dark and censorious times. Here, for Ms Greer, is Liddle in action against a free speech denier from the academic left. I wonder whose side Bonnie is on?
America was a very different place then. In the “Solid South” the white majority opposed civil rights and voted for the party that had opposed the abolition of slavery – the Democrats. Blacks in the South voted for the party that freed them, the Republicans. Civil Rights changed the Dems and changed the south. And no Republican has come close to reversing that shake-up until now.
Quite simply by overseeing massive job creation, aided by his tax cuts, Trump has helped the poorest in America and yes, that means a lot of blacks. He has delivered life changing experiences. Years of listening to Democrats popping down to the ghetto at election time to sing Kumbya brought no jobs, no chance of a better life and black voters are starting to twig, in ever greater numbers, that they were just vote fodder for rich, largely white, liberals.
And how do Dem’s respond, with their white AntiFA activists chasing black conservatives out of restaurants? By trying to prove that Donald trump once used the N word? It may not be singing Kumbya with the folks in the ghetto but it is the same hopeless gesture politics which will make no difference to the lives of ordinary Americans be they white or black.
If Rasmussen is anywhere close to correct then #Trump2020 is a racing cert. The only question is whether Trump’s surging popularity among black and Hispanic voters – as well as his ongoing popularity among whites – will be translated into GOP votes in the mid-terms. If it is, then with many country club Congressmen standing down to be replaced by Trump loyalists the next two years you see a raft of radical reforms as well as a good bit of swamp draining with the folks in Congress singing from the same hymn sheet as POTUS. Bring it on.
Meanwhile have you seen the BBC or Channel 4 Fake News reporting about this earthquake? Is the Guardian telling its dwindling readership that the man they have branded as a racist on an almost daily basis is so popular with black and Hispanic voters? Er…don’t hold your breath. The liberal establishment is, for once, just speechless.
As I am sure you can remember, the liberal media, spearheaded in the UK by the BBC’s repellent Jon Sopel and Beltway Kylie Morris and Matt Frei of Channel 4 Fake News, demonstrated, to their satisfaction, if not that of anyone else, that Donald Trump was a racist back during the Presidential campaign of 2016. The Democrats and Hillary paid a few visits to the ghettos and sung Kumbaya and all was well.
Trump secured just 8% of the black vote which Kylie et al saw as some sort of vindication of the claim that Trump was a racist. Of course, as I pointed out at the time, it was not. That low score was not because Trump is or is not a racist but because, since the 1960s and civil rights blacks have just always voted Democrat however useless was the candidate, crooked Hillary Clinton being a case in point.
Nixon got 35% of the non-white vote in 1960. That was at a point when in the South it was the "Dixiecrats" - Southern Dems - that were resisting Civil Rights and thus blacks there voted for the party that had brought them their freedom from slavery, the party of Lincoln, the GOP. But since then the Republican candidate has - according to Gallup - polled among non white voters:
6% Goldwater 1964
12% Nixon 1968
13% Nixon 1972
15% Ford 1976
10% Reagan 1980
13% Reagan 1984
18% Bush 1988
11% Bush 1992
12% Dole 1996
At this point Gallup seperates hispanics and blacks and other non whites and it is clear that the GOP does a lot worse among black voters than among other non whites (for instance in 2004 polling 7% among blacks and 22% among other non whites to give an overall non-white 17% ) and that implies that the actual black vote since 1960 - other than in 1988 - has been consistently at 10% or below even when the GOP has won the battle for the White House. And so we go on..
3% Bush JNR 2000
7% Bush JNR 2004
1% McCain 2008
5% Romney 2012
In other words, in 2016 Trump did better (despite being a racist bigot according to the MSM) than any GOP candidate this century and almost certainly better than any GOP candidate, other than Bush senior in 1988 and possibly Ford in ’76, since Nixon 58 years ago.
However since the old racist, that is to say Trump, got into the White House the economy has boomed and that has seen more blacks lifted out pf poverty than at any time in memory. Dems may spend billions on Government programmes which employ lots of middle class folks to help the folks in the ghetto but they just don’t work, blacks stay poor. Freeing up the economy does work. Black wages are surging and thus in a poll a few days ago by Rasmussen Trump’s approval rating among black voters was an absolutely astonishing 29%. Now maybe approval ratings do not translate exactly into pulling levers in polling booths but if that poll is anywhere close to accurate this is an earthquake which makes #Trump2020 a slam dunk certainty.
Assuming The Donald has coat-tails it should also make the mid-terms in November very interesting indeed. If the personal popularity of POTUS among blacks translates into an unprecedented enthusiasm for the GOP then the Democrats are in massive trouble.
So how do the Dem’s respond? By threatening a black women having breakfast in a restaurant. I kid you not. This is not 1950s Alabama this is Philadelphia 2018. The black woman Candace Owens is a conservative commentator but video of ANTIFA, nearly all white folks who all support the Dems, driving this photogenic and charming young lady from a diner has shocked America.
As black America considers the idea that, whatever they were told about the bogeyman, racist Trump, they really have never had it so good, now they see the same white folks who called Trump a racist chasing a black woman out of a restaurant and haranguing her, which way do you expect Trump’s ratings to go?
Natch the liberal media and the Democratic party will respond by upping the volume on the chants of racism. But, it seems that black America is just not listening any more.
I cannot but help think that underneath it all Sadiq Khan is a pretty decent fellow. And all too often, as on knife crime in stab City, he is blamed unfairly for the manifest failings of others. But he does have a penchant for wasting other folks cash on pointless virtue signalling, such as the survey showing how racist cycling was, and when it comes to free speech he does apply a bit of a double standard. A case in point was the Trump blimp flown in London yesterday.
I regard the blimp as silly and offensive to a man who was democratically elected to lead the country which is our biggest export market and our most important ally - the US helped us in the Falklands War while our EU "allies" supplied armaments to the Argies. But it is okay to offend. The protesters wanted to make a, childish, point let them do so. Many of us were offended by it and frankly embarrassed that the hatred it stirred up meant that the US embassy had to warn Americans living in London to keep a low profile.
Asked why he did not ban the blimp, Mayor Khan quite rightly said that it was not up to him to decide what was offensive. Spot on Mr Mayor. Except that Mayor Khan has in the past banned certain billboards such as the one below because they were offensive. I think the one below offended women who were lardbuckets and resented the implication that their bodies might not look as good on the beach as the babe below. Which, of course, they don't.
This weekend in Folkestone there was set to be a charity showing of the film Zulu to help raise cash for the arms forces charity SSAFA. Members of the charity voted to show the 1964 classic portrayal of the battle of Rorke’s Drift but, like cycling, they are clearly just racist. 28 virtue signalling busy bodies have written to the Council demanding that the showing be scrapped stating that:
“We believe that the choice of the film Zulu, with its inaccurate portrayal of historical events and its distortions and racist overtones, could have a negative effect on relationships within the changing and richly diverse communities here in Folkestone….
The so-called epic story of ‘honour courage and pride’ portrayed is far from the truth about what really happened.This film glorifies the myth that was created in 1879 after the humiliation of the British military de-feat at the battle of Isandlwana…
The Battle of Rorke’s Drift was, in reality, little more than a footnote after a far more important, and far more gory battle earlier in the day, 11 miles away at Isandlwana.”
Yadda, yadda, yadda.
There is another movie about Isandlwana where 4,000 British soldiers were wiped out by a 20,000 strong Zulu force. Made in 1979 Zulu Dawn is worth watching as well. In reality both battles are just part of the events of the Anglo Zulu wars of 1879. The first battle was a great defeat for Britain the second a bit of a triumph as 156 Brits held off 4,000 Zulus suffering a dozen casualties while the Zulus suffered almost a thousand. 11 Victoria Crosses were awarded after Rorke’s Drift.
The 1964 film Zulu references the earlier defeat at Isandlwana in full. It does have some poetic license. Most of the ordinary soldiers were from the Midlands not, as in the film, from South Wales. But in how the battle was fought, the evacuation of the hospital, the retreat to smaller and smaller redoubts and the characters involved it is fairly accurate.
The Anglo Zulu wars were not as the PC clots imagine a battle between black and white but between two empires. The British Empire in Africa brought railways, Christianity, farming on scale that ended famine, the rule of law and the end of slavery. The militaristic and authoritarian Zulu empire engaged in slavery, plunder and indeed genocide of smaller tribes.
When my PC Mrs or my Islington based daughter start to berate the evils of the British Empire, I cite the conquest of the Zulus as a clear example of a way in which the British made the world a better place. Our empire had its faults but it was a far more pleasant one in the way it treated the various non Zulu tribes of Africa than was the Zulu empire. Indeed after we British won the Anglo Zulu wars the Zulu people themselves were able to enjoy a peaceful existence under British oversight which they had been denied in the decades of aggressive military expansion that had proceeded our arrival.
If schools in Britain today taught history in its full context rather than simply lecturing our kids about our “shameful” Imperial past, no one would be terming the 1964 classic as having racist overtones. But they don’t. This time common sense has prevailed and the showing is going ahead. Almost 18,000 folks took part on a poll run by the local paper and just 7% think the film should be banned.
I wonder how many of those 7% have seen the film they want to ban or understand the context of a clash between two empires where the Brits were not actually the bad guys? I suspect very few. But times are a changing. How long I wonder before the 1964 Michael Caine classic will like most of the comedy from the 1970s be deemed offensive and removed from our screens entirely.
Stranded in the car with the Mrs, I found myself forced to listen to the Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio 2 as it discussed Donald Trump with the author, the Guardian writing metropolitan liberal elitist Christina Patterson. Listeners who liked Trump were invited to call in so that Christina could brand them as racists because she thinks all Trumpsters are racist. Keep it up liberal moron! Every such statement makes #Trump2020 even more of a shoo in.
Remember when Crooked Hillary branded Trump supporters as “Deplorables”. We took that as a badge of honour. Trump’s poll ratings improved. Smearing half the electorate is just not that smart. You kind of know that liberals like Patterson are losing the argument when they are forced to both deny what is fact ( Trump’s poll ratings at this stage of the cycle are very good indeed and getting better) but also just to resort to smears and insults.
The BBC then demonstrated exactly why it is not fair or impartial as Patterson discussed Trump’s policy on tariffs claiming that “it will hurt exactly the people he is trying to help, the white working class.” Consider that statement and let it sink in. Trump’s tariff plans are trying to help the entire working class in the rust belt, a working class that is both black and white. He has not inserted or talked of any measures to ensure only whites benefit. His anti illegal immigration policies, whatever you think of the, do not impact on working class blacks (or whites) in the rust belt except in that it might reduce competition for lower paying jobs.
What Trump is trying to do is to help the working classes. It was Patterson who inserted entirely without justification the word “white” to create fake news. The facts are that wages among black workers are rising faster than ever. Black unemployment is the lowest since 1972 having fallen sharply since Trump took office. The Dems may talk the talk on tackling black poverty but Trump walks the walk and that is why he increased the GOP vote among black voters in 2016, from 2012, and much to the annoyance of folks like Patterson, will increase it again in 2020.
Hell's teeth: I do not even support England, but the sneering elitism of the metropolitan elite, as exemplified by the little read Independent newspaper (below), almost makes me want to. For the avoidance of doubt, with no Irish team in Russia, I am hoping that England triumph. I would not go as far as some of my neighbours in flying the cross of St George but I understand their pride in their country and why they do so.
Where I live in Greece, there are Greek flags everywhere, all the time. In Germany, France, Sweden and Belgium national flags are fluttering today as they cheer on their boys in the World Cup. Only in England is patriotism considered a dirty word by some, that is to say the liberal elite.
If a few racists or extremists fly the English flag they might only be said to have co-opted it if everyone else did as the elites urge and declined to show pride in their nation and shunned the flag. But as anyone who has actually been to a sporting event knows, millions of ordinary folk will these days happily paint their faces or fly the flags with the cross of St George. They do not see themselves as tarred they just have some pride in being English.
It is not how I feel but I see nothing wrong in it. That a rag like the Indy even asks this question, or that the Royal Mail has banned posties from flying the English flag on their vans during the World Cup for fear of offending someone, is a sign of just how out of touch the media, political and business elite has become with the 99%. No other country in Europe is this silly.
Surigng knife crime, a housing crisis, the list of London's problems goes on and on but its truly useless Mayor Sadiq Khan is focussing on the big issues like tackling tweets from Katie Hopkins and today proclaiming that cycling is racist. He is not talking of the cheats in the tour de drugs but of those folks who get on their Boris bike every day.
Will Norman, appointed by Khan as his cycling Czar, has today published a new study showing that only 15% of rides made in the capital are by BME citizens. He has vowed to take action to address this real issue. As Norman Tebbit used to say to the workshy "Get on your bike".
Whether we choose to cycle, walk, catch a bus, the tube or drive is our choice as citizens. It is not the role of Government - perennially bleating on about its lack of funds - to tell us how to travel or to ensure that BME folks use bikes as often as whites. I laugh because this is just so comical and silly. I cry because folks like Will Norman and Khan think that it is their right to extract more cash from hard working citizens to pay for crap like this.
There is no doubt in my mind that the appalling way that the evil apartheid regime treated the late Winnie Mandela and her children is a very legitimate mitigating factor for Winnie as she trudges her way on the long march towards a meeting with St Peter. Indeed the evil of apartheid and the way it treated all dissenters and all black Africans is another factor St Pete will take into account. But I very much doubt that he will be utterly forgiving and, I am sure, that Mrs Mandela will show no sense of repentance. Natch the Guardian, the newspaper of the liberal elite, thinks she did nothing wrong and it goes further, in its usual poisonous way, as it tries to silence debate on this matter. .
Its case put by, among others, Owen Jones & Afua Hirsch is that Apartheid was so evil that whatever happened in the struggle was legitimate. And the columnist below goes a step further in suggesting that anyone challenging that narrative is a racist. Of course. With its usual poison the Guardian wishes to stifle any debate by cowing dissenters into silence for fear of being branded a racist.
To be clear, Mrs Mandela was, during the years when Nelson Mandela was in jail a beacon of hope and her heroism and bravery should be recognised. She was a heroine. However as apartheid was visibly crumbling, not because - as young Mr Jones insists -- of bombs and violence but because of concerted international pressure, both moral and economic, some bad things went on.
Mr Mandela recognised that South Africa could only avoid the appalling bloodshed and chaos that had happened in so many places in post colonial Africa is a rainbow nation worked together. He found it in his heart to genuinely forgive. Mrs Mandela did not, her anger turned to hatred and her vision was of vengeance and was driven by hatred. And that saw her thugs in Mandela United kill other black folks, men and boys, with machete and "necklace" on, often, the most spurious of grounds.
Those murders which Winnie Mandela must be held to account for did not hasten the demise of apartheid. And her agenda of hatred and vengeance is still alive in some circles today. That is why being a white farmer in South Africa is now the most dangerous profession on earth in terms of murder rate. Winnie Mandela's calls to action after her husband's release legitimised hatred and vengeance.
One of the great things about Nelson Mandela was that he was the first to admit his sins and his failings as a man although his actions ahead of and after release showed a level of forgiveness which marks him out as a superior being to almost all of us. With Mrs Mandela there was no such humility, no such acceptance of her failings. Yes she was a hero but she also did some very bad things. To refuse to accept that balanced appraisal as the Guardian writers like Mr Jones and Afua Hirsch do is just dishonest. To smear those offering a more balanced perspective is simply poisonous.
"You don't like black people getting rights, you don;t like women getting jobs" That is how on her recent foreign tour as you can see in the video below, crooked Hillary Clinton has now described those folks in all those red flyover states who voted for Donald Trump in 2016. During the election she slammed folks backing Trump as "the Deplorables". For many decent Americans that became a badge of honour.
Slamming almost half of your fellow citizens as ignorant racists and sexists is just not very smart. Sure, some Trump voters are racist and sexist. But the polls show that some Dems are, in terms of social attitudes, also racist and sexist and also that white women, for instance, overwhelmingly voted Trump not for a woman who enabled her husband to be a serial rapist. Does Hillary really believe that all those tens of millions of women who voted Trump "don't like women getting jobs?"
Really Hillary? You cannot be serious. Either the Democrats play along with this lunacy in which case #Trump2020 becomes even more of a racing cert or the Dems cut this woman loose as she really has now lost the plot.
Yeah that Donald Trump is a racist, our sort of story, says the Guardian and thus leads its foreign news section with a story "US Senator uses Trump Pocohontas jibe to raise awareness". Dem uber-bore Elizabeth Warren, according to the Guardian: "responded to President Trump's latest Pocohontas jibe yesterday by highlighting sexual violence against native American women, a tactic she said she would pursue every time the President "threw out" such a "racial slur"
Yes Trump calls Warren Pocohontas. The Guardian, being written by and for humourless liberal bastards desperate to show what an evil racist POTUS is, does not tell you why. So let me help. When Warren applied for a job at Harvard Law school she said that she was a Native American although if you look at her she appears to be whiter than most members of the Hitler Youth. But the liberals who run HLS loved the diversity cred and boasted about how they had their first "woman of color" on the payroll back in 1995.
Warren even contributed some old family recipes to a cookbook of Native American cuisine. Although it subsequently emerged that they were not very Native American at all less still part of the Warren family archive and, in fact, came from a plush restaurant she frequented. So then folks started pushing her on her claimed Indian heritage.
Eventually, by now in Congress, her staff managed to find a great great great grandmother who was designated as Cherokee in the online transcription of a marriage application of 1894. Great. So Warren was 1/32nd Native American and 31/32 white but she is still according to Harvard Law School a woman of color and according to the Dems a "Native American"
Unfortunately, the actual original marriage license does not list Great-Great-Great-Grandma as Cherokee at all so it now looks as if Ms Warren is in fact 32/32 white. Did you know I was 1/64th Swiss - can I claim any special exemptions if I go to Switzerland and claim my birthrights as being as Swiss as cuckoo clocks, alpine ski-ing and stashing gold stolen by the Nazis from Jews they had murdered? Have I told you about the old family recipe for Bűndnernusstorte passed down from my great, great great great Grandmother? Is there a compilation cook book I can submit it to as I reclaim my heritage? Of course not, my claim to be Swiss would be ridiculed. And as such for Trump to laugh at Warren's claim to be a Native American by calling her Pocohontas when she is, at the very best, 1/32 Native American but almost certainly, just like Frosty the Snowman, that is to say 100% white, seems perfectly fair.
It is not a racial slur on the Native Americans but a legitimate jibe at a woman who has played the race card to perfection to advance her own career in a way that will distract attention from the real issues Native Americans face. It is not a bad joke nickname but we all know that those on the left have no sense of humour at all and also a bit of a problem with real facts.
But its worse than that. By failing to put Trump's comments into their true context, the Guardian serves up what can only be seen as fake news. The article will confirm all the prejudices of its diminishing band of readers about the leader of the free world but it is one that is profoundly misleading.
The man dubbed America's pastor has passed away aged 99. It did not take the Guardian more than a few hours to accuse Billy Graham of the most heinous crimes "In his early years as a preacher, Graham expressed racist and antisemitic views" and also attacking him for his unswerving hostility to communism. In the eyes of the liberal elite, opposing a Godless faith which cased the death of tens of millions of folks is a bad thing, being a spy for the Czech secret police is a minor issue. Whatever
The fact that Billy Graham was an early campaigner against segregation, an active anti- Apartheid campaigner and a friend and strong ally of Martin Luther King is neither here nor there. The Guardian would rather judge a man not by decades of good deeds of hard, brave and principled acts to make the world a better place but by a few quotes from what was another era.
I was taken by some evangelical friends of my family to see Billy Graham as a teenager at, I think, Villa Park. I have long struggled with the issue of faith. as a teen I certainly found him charismatic and what he said had great appeal. Unlike some of the quack preachers one sees, Graham left you in no doubt that he meant every word he said. A few years ago he said that he was looking forward to meeting God face to face. if that meeting is happening right now I doubt that God will be swayed by the opinions of the Godless folk round at the Guardian, and instead will be giving a good man a warm embrace.
I still struggle with the idea that such a meeting will be taking place. And that is not because I am in denial about how the meeting would go for me for I accept all too many of my failings. If there is such a meet on my own day of judgement I would just have to hope that God finds my repentance sincere and is indeed truly merciful. Surely God must be merciful? But if he is, how can he allow all the miseries of the human condition, the iniquities that hand some an early and painful death and others all life's treats?
On balance, I still can't bring myself to believe that ones next meeting after death is not with the worms. Even Billy Graham could not convince me otherwise. But I remain open to persuasion and am trying to keep an open mind. Unlike folks round at the Guardian.
My twitter feed is set up to track what is trending in New York. I used to live there and feel as much affinity with that City as I do with any other City, i.e. almost none. And so this morning I find out that what is trending among the the snowflakes of the Big Apple is #ReplaceLovewithAnal. Cue a series of tweets God is Anal, Jesus anals you #Replacelovewithanal etc etc etc.
In New York to trivialise sex as a purely physical act and to insult the Christian faith is just the way folks act. Natch no-one is tweeting Muhammad anals you #Replacelovewithanal as that would be culturally insensitive, racist, insulting and would get an immediate life ban on twitter after a general new media flaming. But bash those Christians, those of the old discredited faith, hell they are fair game.
This is New York. I guess that the LA and San Francisco twitter feeds were pretty similar. These are the folks enjoying the asset bubble ( until Friday) and who voted for crooked Hillary. But most Americans outside the coastal fleshpots not only don't think that way but actually find it offensive.
When the coach and the two star players of the Philadelphia Eagles were interviewed after their Superbowl win on Sunday all three thanked God or Jesus. They meant it. And most folks watching, outside of the coastal Cities, either murmured approval or would have done the same .
There are two Americas. The Democratic Party stands firmly with those in the coastal Cities of Sodom & Gomorrah who think telling jokes with a punchline involving Jesus and anal sex is at the cutting edge of wit. Donald Trump stands with the rest of the Country who don't get that, not funny, joke and are offended by it. And there is no sign that those cultural battle lines will change by 2020.
For what it is worth folks should be allowed to tweet unfunny jokes about Jesus or Muhammad having anal sex without any fear of the consequences. That is called free speech. But equally folks like me, and all those folks in the flyover states, should be free to say that such tweets are pointless, unfunny and offensive and show the tweeters up as vacuous and unfunny airheads whom all right thinking folks can justly despise.
The Independent newspaper, a little read beacon of the London liberal elitists, hopes that we enjoy the film "The Darkest Hour" but urges its few readers to remember that its lead figure, Winston Churchill, was a racist with a string of unacceptable views. Otherwise it loves the film. Where to start?
My grandfather was actually in Churchill's war rooms although only, at the time, as a relatively middle ranking civil servant. But he reported to Bridges the head of the Civil Service who appears in this movie which was enjoyable enough. What the Independent should have been alerting its readers to is the fact that it is not very historically accurate. Since most folks will not bother reading any source material the lies of this film will now become accepted as truths, as part of history. It is not history, this film is fiction based on some facts.
The movie makes great play of how the Labour opposition was united in supporting Churchill when he took over from a discredited Chamberlain. That is largely true. But the film suggests that the Tories were united in disliking Winnie either through personal animosity or because they were appeasers like Chamberlain, Men of Munich as they were then known, or in a few cases folks who wanted to cut a deal with Hitler as they thought he was not all bad. That is simply not the case.
By the time Churchill was in charge Chamberlain was discredited and also dying and so carried very little weight. Moreover there was always a sizeable faction within the Tory/National Liberal Government that agreed with Churchill from the outset. The film suggests that only Eden was a loyalist and in his case a timid one but that is just not the case. By the time Churchill gives his "we shall fight them" speech in Parliament even most of the Men of Munich were already onside. So the film is just factually wrong although one can imagine that the liberal luvvies who made it can't have objected to heroic socialists standing with Churchill against the Nazis while the Tories en masse equivocated or worse.
There is also a major, and clearly utterly fictional, scene in the film where Churchill goes into a tube carriage to do a sort of impromptu focus group on how the ordinary folks thought. They were naturally, as one, wanting to fight on the beaches although, even by 1940, that is not how all Britons felt. So awful were the memories of World War 1 that some folks wanted to avoid a second such conflict at all costs. But Churchill's bogus focus group was united. Message to audience: Gosh, even then those fucking Tory bastards were just so out of touch with ordinary folks. Nothing changes does it?
Natch, to reflect the London of today it also had a prominent Afro-Caribbean figure with his white girlfriend. That might just have been possible but it is extraordinarily unlikely. In 1940 there were fewer than 20,000 black folks in Britain. That is one in 25,000 of the population. And as for mixed relationships? My wife is of colour and today no-one bats an eye-lid as we walk down the street but in the 1930s it just did not happen. That is except in films made in 2017 by liberal luvvies imposing today's values and reality on yesterday. Sure go ahead and do that but then do not have the cheek to term this a historical drama. It is fiction.
And that brings us to the Indy. Churchill was a man of his time. We all are. So that meant Churchill taking part in cavalry charges against folk in Africa, thinking we should fight all out wars against the Boers (who did capture him & intern him you may remember?) etc etc. So he had attitudes of his time. It would have been extraordinary if he did not and was instead demanding equal rights for trans folks and that the BEF be offered Gluten free rations as a basic civil right. The Indy talks of Boer "concentration camps" which makes you think of Auschwitz. They were tented camps with barbed wire on the outside. It is not quite the same thing. So the paper rewrites history and slams Churchill for holding the same views as everyone else.
Churchill may not have been PC in today's terms but even the Indy might agree that Hitler was far, far worse. That Adolf did not prevail is, at least, partially down to Churchill and surely that is they key point here?
I say partly because one matter this very week in terms of fact, film overlooks, in the name of drama, is that Britain should have lost despite the efforts of Churchill. Had the German armies pushed on into Dunkirk instead of stopping to allow the Luftwaffe to "finish the job" the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), our professional army, would not have escaped at all. Instead 330,000 men made it back to Blighty. Had the Luftwaffe pushed on against RAF's fighter command for a few more days instead of turning to bombing London it would have won control of the skies. By Christmas 1940 it would almost certainly have been all over.
And I might not be here. Recording my father's memoirs on Monday we touched many times on what would have happened to his father had Germany invaded. Simple: because of where he worked he was on a list of those to be shot. It is far from certain that his family would have been spared.
I cannot deny that the award winners were worthy recipients. President Trump handed out gongs to various outlets. CNN was given four “awards”, with The New York Times taking two and one each going to ABC News and the magazines Time and Newsweek. But none for the BBC. Shocking.
Who can forget that classic BBC Newsnight "scoop" that Trump was doing so badly that he would lose Utah and Alaska to crooked Hillary and thus the GOP had to dump him before it was too late? Or numerous utterly bogus stories and 99% of Sopel's coverage. Only the other day Sopel posted a whole report on the new Trump book by Michael Wolff listing the damning quotes but neglecting to mention both Wolff's history of making up quotes in prior books or the fact that several of those quoted in this book - including Tony Blair - had denied quotes in this book. Surely with Sopel as its lead man the BBC merited an award for fake news such as this gem on the embassy move in Israel? It was robbed. Next year maybe POTUS could like the Oscars introduce a best foreign language category for the BBC to win by a country mile?
As for Channel 4 News, the home of British fake News: well I guess with its audience size Mr Trump had to draw the line somewhere in terms of obscure crackpot outlets fronted up by millionaire elititst liberal nutjobs like Cathy Newman.
On C4 Fake News Newman introduced the Prof as a "hero of the Alt Right". Alt Right started as a term which was very specific in the US and liberals quickly started to use it as interchangeable with racist, bigot, fascist etc. And by implication they thus argued that anyone who was a hero of the Alt Right must also be a racist, bigot, fascist etc. As it happens Jordan is a hero of many folks on the centre and right for the way he shows how data can be used to mislead. But for folks like Newman anyone to the right of Kenneth Clarke is more or less Alt Right. So she introduced the interview with a smear.
What followed was 30 minutes of comedy. Time and time again Peterson would make a point. Newman would respond by stating that he had said something completely different and accused him of bigotry on that basis. Hence at 5 minutes 40 seconds she says "so you deny the gender pay gap". Of course Peterson had denied nothing of the sort - and this seems all to close to home for me with recent events at Bath Spa - he merely stated clearly that there are a number of facts that explain the gap of which gender is only one.
The interview is full of such classics from Newman " Why shouldn't women have the right to children" she asks. Natch Jordan had never said they did not. "You're saying (gender) equality won't happen" Cathy asserted. Jordan had said nothing of the sort. At 27 minutes in there is a superb segment on lobsters in which Newman asserts " You are saying we should organise our society along the lines of lobsters." It goes without saying that Jordan Peterson had said absolutely nothing of the sort.
At one point, after another ludicrous made up assertion from Newman, Peterson noted that her comments were made "because you are not listening.". At around 23 minutes on the matter of free speech which Peterson believes in for all, but Newman believes in only selectively, Peterson actually managed to silence his harpie interregator with a question she could not answer.
You might think that Newman's string of ludicrous bogus assertions and failure to grasp hard data is a sign that she is very stupid. That would be a mistake, she is not. Like nearly all the media liberals she is a product of public school ( Charterhouse) and Oxbridge ( dark blue). She is clever. Her problem is that she is liberal media establishment to the core. It is in her DNA. Thus she does not believe in free speech where it challenges her core beliefs and she will not listen to those who advance arguments or produce data which really threaten those beliefs. And it was actions driven by that mindset which left her looking so remarkably stupid in the interview below.
However, I generally did wear one. Partly that was to annoy Guardian reading friends of my Mrs who used words like nationalism and imperialism when they saw the flower appear. And partly because I have real respect for the ordinary men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. However pointless the conflict, and World War One was the ultimate in pointless wars, those who fell were brave and believed they were doing the right thing in serving their country, whichever country that was. They have my respect.
How things have changed in just a few years. The left is resurgent. And so we see the Rev Steve Bailey of Oadby banning Onward Christian Soldiers from his Remembrance day service lest it offend folks of other faiths. The only non Christian who regularly attends Bailey's Armistice Day service is a Hindu veteran who things the vicar is a loon. Of course he is.
Over in the little read and patronising rag that is the dreary Independent last year, perennial loon Robert Fisk argued that the poppy was racist since it was largely worn by we Brexit lovers who want to throw our wartime allies (the Poles etc) out of Britain. Of course we do not and have never said we would and outside the media bubble millions of ordinary folks wear poppies as a quiet sign of respect for men of all races and all colours who died fighting for their country. They have nothing to do with Brexit or racism or anything bad.
There may be a few racists who wear poppies but that does not mean they own the flower. This is the sort of logic that for many years saw metropolitan elitists like Fisk shun the National Flag since it had "become the symbol of the extreme right". Of course it had not and eventually that idiotic thinking was abandoned.
In the face of more pressure from folks who are wrong on every great issue of our time to wear no poppy or a white poppy, my mind is made up. It is a red poppy for me with money going to a good cause, my respects for the dead paid and my contempt for an increasing number of the living demonstrated..
I have noted many times before how free speech no longer exists on campuses across the West. If you pursue a politically correct strict liberal orthodoxy you can say what you want. Anything goes. All men are animals and wannabe rapists, white folks must be ashamed of all their crimes and so are innately evil racists. Heterosexuals should be under-represented in Parliament. Trans is the new normal. Its okay to say you want to assassinate President Trump. The Jewish state acts like Nazis and has no right to exist. All those statements are, to me, obscene and/or untrue but on campuses across Britain and the US they are repeated and accepted as fine every day.
Those who dare to disagree whether they be evil conservatives such as Ann Coulter or uber-liberals like Germaine Greer or the great Peter Tatchell ho just slipped up (usually on Trans issues) then you get no platformed. Try saying something really controversial like the British Empire did a lot of good (which it did), Britain did more to abolish slavery than any African state has ever done (again true) or that climate change is pure fiction (which it is) and as an academic, your career is toast even if the remarks are made in private.
The latest lunacy comes from Edinburgh where a spiky law student Robbie Travers responded to news that the Americans just dropped a vast bomb on ISIS fighters with a facebook post: "Excellent news that the US administration and Trump ordered an accurate strike on an IS network of tunnels in Afghanistan. “I’m glad we could bring these barbarians a step closer to collecting their 72 virgins.”
You and I might say "spot on" - I find it hard to disagree with the view that the only good ISIS fighter is a dead ISIS fighter. The acts committed by ISIS over the past few years are the acts of barbarians. Think of the beheadings, think of burning folks alive in cages or immersing a cage full of prisoners into a swimming pool and filming the poor men as they drown. Think about the mass rape and enslavement of thousands of captured women. Think of the poor homosexuals chucked off the top of buildings. ISIS are barbarians and they do believe that the reward for their barbarity is to go to heaven to shag 72 virgins. So any rational person would agree that Mr Travers is bang on the money. At the very least he has a right to such an opinion.
Oh no. Step forward Esme Allman a second-year history student and the former black and ethnic minority convenor of the university’s students’ association, who filed a complaint to the university, saying: “Not only do I believe this behaviour to be in breach of the student code of conduct, but his decision to target the BME Liberation Group at the University of Edinburgh, and how he has chosen to do so, puts minority students at risk and in a state of panic and fear while attending the University of Edinburgh.”
The University said that it would investigate poor Mr Travers for a hate crime. He then inflamed the situation by posting a note saying "black men are trash". Got him. Fair cop. The guy is a bigot. Send him down. Oh hang on. In fact it was Ms Allman who posted on her facebook site "To conclude, black men are trash. All men are trash." Mr Travers merely pointed out that she has posted this rubbish. This got him reported again by Ms Allman who said "Travers published a decontextualised quote by Allman from a privileged conversation generated by minority students in a safe space he is neither subscribed to nor a member of, without her consent."
Aha so it is okay to make a bigoted comment in a private group (not sure your facebook page counts as such) as that is not a problem. Really? One assumes that Ms Allman would be fine with the Klu Klux Klan organising at Edinburgh as long as all their comments were made in a "safe space" private forum? Of course she would not. She has been exposed as a serial spouter of shite.
But in taking this appalling young woman seriously and in investigating Travers for his original remark celebrating the demise of the ISIS barbarians Edinburgh shows how again how the liberal left world of academia has completely abandoned all ideas of supporting free speech or indeed of common sense.
And it is in this brave new world in which our kids are apparently being taught how to think for themselves. Once again I despair.
General Robert Lee was a good man, devout, honourable and widely admired. But he fought for "the wrong side" in the US Civil war so while most Americans disagree, his statue must come down. Overnight in Baltimore a 225 year old statue of Christopher Columbus was destroyed. On this one probably about 98% of Americans would support keeping the ancient monument standing, although in the liberal media bubble the numbers will be the other way round..
The protesters reckon that Columbus was a racist, imperialist, blah, blah,. blah. He probably did not allow any transexuals on the Santa Maria either but his list of crimes is long enough already so he must go. Another part of America's heritage is destroyed as it looks to a bright new future.
So who is next? This madness is not confined to the other side of the Atlantic. You will remember how in Oxford, a student there on a Rhodes Scholarship led a campaign to remove a statue of ....Cecil Rhodes. The man who ensured that a vile imperialist nation that engaged in wholesale war crimes ( the Zulus) was replaced by a far more civilised bunch of Imperialists (the evil Britishers) was, in the simple analysis of 2017, a racist imperialist just like Columbus. Although Rhodes was gay that was not enough to save him from the ire of the mob, the angry minority.
Next in line is Lord Nelson. We honour this man because he gave his ;life for his country and led our naval forces to stop France from invading us and conquering all of Europe. So Nelson was clearly a good egg. Oh no. We now discover in the loathsome Guardian newspaper that in the House of Lords he spoke out against the efforts of my forebear William Wilberforce and others to end slavery. Nelson was - like most of the US founding fathers - a supporter of slavery. And thus the campaign is underway to remove him from his column and erase him from history. It matters not a jot that we honour him for saving our nation or for making the ultimate sacrifice, he is found wanting on another matter and that is that.
Of all of the liberal media harpies covering the US election, beltway Kylie Morris of Channel 4 fake News was the most openly partisan as I exposed time and again HERE. Her crowning glory was to make up words for Donald Trump to smear him as a racist HERE. Like her fake news colleagues Kylie cannot get over the defeat of crooked Hillary so she fights on, twisting the truth to smear POTUS. The pulling down of Confederate staues and war memorials has been one of her finest hours.
To recap, President Trump condemned such acts. He did not say that they were morally equivalent to the Neo Nazis on the march, he made it clear that the latter were far worse. Trump is not - as the Guardian and BBC have falsely stated - any any way an apologist for the fascists. But he attacks those tearing down memorials to brave men who fought and died with their neighbours to, as they saw it, protect their homelands.
Kylie and her fake news colleagues as well as the liberal luvvies from Hollywood and the metropolitan elites smeared Trump as an apologist for Nazis but also said that there was outrage in America at his comments. The conclusion - it was POTUS that was out of touch.
I found that impossible to believe. Most Americans are good decent folks who would find the real outage being the desecration of a war memorial to their fellow Americans. And blow me down with a feather, polls out yesterday showed that I was right. A YouGov poll showed that of those with an opinion 39.5% of all Americans approved of taking down a statue of General Robert Lee in North Carolina but 61.5% disapproved. Marist conducted a poll about all Confederate monuments not just the Lee statue and the scores of those with a view were 30.3% for removal and 69.7% for staying up.
Hell's teeth among black voters the split on the latter poll was - among those with a firm view - 52.4% versus 47.6%. By the way that is in favour of keeping the monuments up!
Trump again tweeted that the statues should stay up which prompted Kylie to say that he was a) just playing to the polls and b) risking dividing America.
That is a shocking distortion of the truth. Trump has maintained his consistent position throughout. And it is clear that his stance is one that reflects a clear majority view and an overwhelming majority view in America. The outrage that C4 fake News and the rest of the liberal media has been reporting on for two weeks is not an outrage across America but an outrage of a minority of folks who backed the losing side on November 8 and, unable to accept that it is their party that is out of touch not Trump, just cannot help themselves.
As for the assertion that Trump's comments risk dividing America, how on earth can that be justified in the face of poll numbers which show that, once again, POTUS holds views that reflect those of most Americans, though they may be alien to those in the degenerate liberal media bubble in which Kylie lives.
The liberal media might think that dishonouring brave Americans who died in a horrible war. But however much they bully us into thinking that it their way is the moral way, to anyone with a shred of decency - including it seems 70% of Americans - their views are quite simply loathsome. And the more they and the Dems on Capitol Hill spout such views, the more certain a Trump win in 2020 becomes.
The headline from the Guardian, below, says it all. Former chancellor Nigel Lawson's Thought Crime is not believing in mad made global warming. The BBC had the timerity to allow him on one of its numerous features on climate change in the interests of balance. Its sister paper says it should erase Lawson from history and show no balance at all when covering climate change.
The liberal left argues that man made carbon emissions is causing global warming or, as it is known when it is wet or cold, climate change. It argues this is fact. It cannot be a fact since facts, derived from the latin factum, are things that have happened. Thde suggestion that if we belch out more carbon the world gets hotter is a thesis not a fact.
The Guardian argues that the case is 100% proven so there is no need for balance. But back in 1973 scientists were universally agreed that the world faced a new ice age. Fifteen years ago scientists argued that we needed to subsidise diesel to save the planet. On both we have seen complete volte faces.
Twenty or thirty years ago the benefits of multiculturalism were just unarguable for most of the left. Anywone who questioned this was denounced as a racist and debate was shut down. Now even the racist-finder General himself Trevor Phillips admits he was wrong.
It is becuase the experts can, and often do, get it horribly wrong that debate is vital. But across the media, and on campuses across the West there is an othodoxy and challenging that is just not allowed. We are on the right may disagree with almost every opinon carried in the Guardian but we would fight for the right of Owen Jones, Polly Toynbee, George Monbiot and all the other crazies to speak out. The left, on the other hand, sees the crushing of dissent as a positive virtue.
Following on from the "Jews caused Grenfell Tower" Al Quds day march you would have thought that the British Authorities might try to put a temporary ban on public demonstrations of overt Jew hating. Oh no. This form of racism appears to be perfectly acceptable in Britain today. Is it any wonder that across Western Europe Jews are packing up and heading to the one place they feel safe, the only democracy in the Middle East: Israel?
This weekend's star Jew baiter is Ebrahim Bham who is a former adviser to the Taliban and is speaking at "The Palestine Expo" at the Government owned QE2 Centre in Westminster. The whole show has has been organised by the Friends of Al-Aqsa, whose chairman, Ismail Patel, once publicly denied that Hamas was a terrorist organisation. This organisation supports a complete boycott of all Israeli products.
Bham can be found on video stating:
Goebbel (sic) was a very famous minister of the Nazis, and he tried to justify the killing of the Jews. Now as far as we are concerned, we do not need to feel apologetic because it was not done by Muslims.
The Muslims did not do it, but they had to suffer the consequences of the Holocaust. Because Europe, because of its guilt, had to shed its Jews. And they couldn’t put them in Europe, they put them in Palestine at the expense of the indigenous Palestinian Muslim people.”
One day he said that ‘People tell me that Jews are human beings. Yes, I know they are human beings. Just as fleas are also animals. Just as fleas are also animals, they are also part of human beings like that.’
Natch, the Friends of Al-Aqsa has denounced the revelations as a Jewish plot to stop its show, saying that its star speaker had been misquoted by the Jewish Chronicle;. Thus fucking Jews they really are bastards who will stoop to anything are they not?
The Jew haters go on to admit, in their laughable denial, that in fact Bham did give the quote but just to show how awful the Nazis were to the Jews. So now he is a campaigner for Jewish welfare as well? Praise be to Allah.
The whole thing stinks. If anyone were daft enough to compare Muslims or any ethnic minority to any lowly regarded form of animal life they would be the subject of virulent online campaign which would inevitably see them losing their job and being investigated by the Met for hate crimes. But when it comes to Jew hating in 2017 London it seems that all is fair and acceptable.
It is not acceptable. It is not fair. If we are going to have laws against hate crimes then use them universally. And more to the point why on earth are we allowing Government owned buildings to be used for hosting such an obvious hatefest? The Government could stop this. After all it banned a conference by Church groups at the QE2 in 2011 because the agenda was about campaigning against gay marriage. But those were just Christians so who cares about denying them free speech? Some are more equal than others.
The conversation turned to how people in Middle America, the flyover states, could bring themselves to vote for Trump. And to so do in droves. Snow boasted that he had been there! Cripes Glasto, New York, LA and then the flyover states. Next they will be sending the great metropolitan liberal to spend a week on a council estate in in Rochdale. Naomi looked impressed - Jon seemed to have survived his encounter with horrible, god fearing, gun owning, hard working and patriotic Americans unscathed.
They discussed Trump rolling back Obamacare, something that most Americans support because President Hopey Change's mad scheme does not help the poor but costs ordinary folks an arm and a leg. But while most Americans want Obamacare rolled back which is one reason the Donald lives where he does today, that does not impress Naomi at all. FFS Next these disgusting rednecks will want America to have real jobs rather than exporting them to Mexico or China. Naomi is convinced that what folks in the sort of states in America's heartland that she would not visit without getting her jabs first, wanted is more than Obamacare "they want an NHS but one that is properly funded."
Oh yes, the world's third largest employer, the financial black hole that gave you Mid Staffs, Harold Shipman, the deaths at Bristol kids hospital and natch hair removal operations for transexuals on demand. It's Obamacare on Steroids. The polls - either opinion polls or that glorious poll of last November, the one where Naomi would have voted for the losing candidate had she not been an Alien, show most Americans wanted, at best Obamacare light, very few wanted a US NHS. But heck, Naomi knows better than the great unwashed. Millionaire liberals from the Coasts always do, especially those who have lived their entire lives in the leafy groves of academia and journalism.
Natch Snow did not challenge Klein's assertion that Americans really want their very own Mid Staffs. She said it. He has not met anyone who would think otherwise apart from a few folks on his brief tour of the flyover states and he has tried to forget that mixing with the great unwashed. So it was just left in the air as a fact. That's Channel 4 Fake News for you.
I was wandering towards passport control from where my Easyjet flight from Kalamata had landed, that is to say bloody miles from anywhere, when I heard a woman's voice behind me. "Welcome to bloody Brexit land" she said sneeringly and loudly. Quick as a flash, I said equally loudly "Or as we call it these days, the newly free and independent United Kingdom."
She scoffed and expressed surprise that she had met someone who supported Brexit. I pointed out that we had voted for Brexit in a referendum last year so there were an awful lot of people like me. She scoffed again, and displaying a grasp of arithmetic of which Diane Abbott would be proud said "Only 51% voted for it, it was a minority".
As one of the 52%, which is like 51% a majority, it was hard to know how to counter that remark but I had no need to, as the woman was keen not to let me interrupt her monologue and continued "I know how you people think as I worked here for several years." I did not question her deep understanding of the British national psyche but decided that I would virtue signal and so said "and how much we enjoy folks like you coming from Europe to work hard in Britain. You are so welcome." I said this in a genuine way and I meant it. I was enjoying being welcoming and also showing how bloody virtuous I was.
The woman snapped back "well enjoy being an isolated island cut off from Europe." I countered with "we will be great global citizens ( bonus marks for that PC phraseology) and trade with the growing economies around the world, India, China , the USA not just the ageing economic zombie that is Europe" Ouch. The woman's partner butted in "you will sell weapons to Turkey so it can attack Greece where we come from."
I am pretty sure that supplying weapons to Turkey is not a mainstay of Britain's manufacturing base and there is no evidence that Turkey is about to attack its fellow NATO member in Greece. But I was not sure that countering untruths with facts was working so I told the chap "I have a house in Greece, I live there, Britain is not going to arm an invasion."
By this time we were almost at passport control and the queue was bunching up. The woman snapped "We don't want you in Greece, we want you to get out." She did not quite say "Go back where you came from" but she had more or less said it. I could not resist.
"Racist!" I shouted. "You are a racist". I repeated this several times loudly enough for all the folks around us to hear. The boyfriend tried to butt in "what she said was not racist it was xenophobic." I think that he might technically be accurate but we virtue signallers do not care about minor details. I was on a roll. I shouted "you are a racist" at her and, as I very loudly said the words "hate crime," I turned my back, visibly shaking my head. She went quiet.
By this time the fuzz at the UK border were just yards away. I did think about reporting the poor bubble for hate crime there and then. London's Mayor says we must report all incidents and since I had been offended by her comments this was clearly a hate crime as defined in Orwellian 2017 Airstrip One. But I was in a rush to head off to see my father so I contented myself with turning round a couple of times and staring at her shaking my head and engaging in a spot more virtue signalling.
I told the Mrs that I had been a victim of hate crime at Gatwick Airport. She seemed unconvinced. Guardianistas like the Mrs think that straight, white, affluent, able bodied, middle aged men cannot be a victim of hate crime. She does not understand. If I was thirty years younger I would go light a candle and add a twibbon to my twitter account as I tweet to myself and I rush to a counsellor who will help me cope with this most traumatic of incidents.
The key point here as a virtue signaller is to point out that this story is all about me and that I am a real victim. Now, where do I get a counsellor?
In the leafy London Borough of Islington where smug Guardian readers live in £3 million houses they voted overwhelmingly against Brexit. Of course they did, The pious liberal elite know that only thick, old, white racist white van driving working class types wanted to leave. But the battle goes on lead by a group Islington in EU which holds regular events including one with the odious Gina Miller as you can see below. Its website is a stormer, beyond satire, with a star exhibit a poem which displays the prejudices but also the sheer ignorance of these folk perfectly. The key four lines are underlined by me:
A poem: You're a citizen of nowhere, by Salena Gonnen
We did not vote for Mrs May This harsh and xenophobic way Black ice eyes, jaw clenched tight Flying flags for the far right
All 'them' and 'us' and 'there' and 'here' Here is May: Hate, spite and fear
Cruel winds do shake the darling fists of May No tolerance or kindness on display If you're a citizen of the world, you're a citizen of nowhere Citizen of don't care, citizen of no welfare
Socrates spits on Number Ten Drowned babies on Greek shores again And there is May with her fat share All 'us' and 'them' and 'here' and 'there'
Today it was decreed across the land We make a list of names of foreign hand Name and shame each foreigner in our midst Just a bit like... Schindlers List
Separate rich and poor, black and white Shaking hands with the far right It's 'them' and 'us' and 'there' and 'here' And words like 'foreign' loud and clear
Socrates spits at number ten We are ALL citizens of the world. Amen And citizens of the world we'll remain We're star dust, salt and sand grain
We did not vote for Mrs May They slipped her in to save their day So disappointing that she chooses The side of fear that always loses
Black ice eyes, her heart stone grey We did not vote for Mrs May We did not vote for Mrs May We did not vote for you, Mrs May
You get the gist. Mrs May = far right = Nazi = Brexit = dead babies. As I have noted before, if you go around calling all sorts of folks Nazis and linking them to the holocaust you diminish the sheer horror of the actual holocaust and the unique evil of the Nazis. This poem is an insult to 6 million dead Jews and is utterly offensive as a result. But it is worse. It is dumb.
The link to Schindler's List is meant to make you compare Amber Rudd's daft idea of registering foreign workers to the Nazis. Miss Rudd's idea was daft, unworkable and morally repugnant but it was not really like the Nazis was it? Have the folks watched footage of the liberation of Dachau recently as they compare Ms Rudd's plans to those of Her Hittler?
But there is another matter the folks at Islington in EU appear to have overlooked.Oskar Schindler was one of the good guys. I've been to his grave in Jerusalem. His list was of folks who, thanks to his bravery, got saved from the Nazis.
But heck who cares about such minor detail? We all know that those who voted to stay are the smart intellectuals who care and offend no-one and we who voted to leave are just plain thick and the sort who offend everyone. We plebs should just shut up and do as our Islington dwelling betters order.
This is a delight. Millionaire liberal media elitist Evan was wetting himself on the BBC's fake news flagship Newsnight as he got to interview two delightful ladies who are black and voted for Donald Trump. Evan started by saying that since black folks did not vote for Trump so he was puzzled by these ladies.
Above the main field at Butterwell Farm in Byfield was a smaller field. On one side was a continuation of the dry stone wall that separated our land from that of Mr Peter Thompson, on the other the extensive gardens that my mother worked to create. At the bottom ,separating this land from the main field, was a giant old barn which contained a wooden three-seater lavatory seat among other gems. At the top there was another barn which in turn formed one half of one side of the yard behind our house. We we worked hard to turn the barn into a fox proof hen-house. and then started to build up a flock of chickens with the odd bantam picked up along the way, for fun.
This was part of the self sufficiency drive led by my mother. I think we offered the chickens a good home. The barn was secure. Our cat, to whom I will turn later but who had various names including Jesus Christ, ensured there were few rodents. The field was large enough and had a good patch of nettles by the dry stone wall allowing hens to lay enough eggs which were undetectable, to frustrate a boy sent out to collect breakfast. Why would a hen lay eggs in the nettles and not in the nice straw we laid down in the hen house?
Most of the chickens had no name. They were all the same red colour and so would it be racist to say that they all looked the same to me? I think that in the 1970s such an observation was not a hate crime. Such birds had a good life until one day they were unlucky enough to be picked up by father for a quick neck wring, plucking and a move to the pot.
At this point, any snowflake or Islington urbanite readers who had hitherto assumed that chickens were made by Waitrose and was unaware of how they are killed, may feel horrified and nauseated, I apologise not. Our chickens had a good, open air sort of life and their end was very quick. Perhaps not giving them names depersonalised the killing experience for my father who was the sole executioner.
There were one or two birds that had names. There was a bantam cockerel with black feathers and a fine red and orange plumage whose job was to "look after" the two bantam hens. He was, for some reason, named Mr Peter Thompson after the neighbouring farmer. Please note that in any conversation it was always Mr Peter Thompson not Peter Thompson. Again, there is no rationale or reason for this. Neither of the bantam ladies ever produced bantam chicks. Was Mr Peter Thompson (the bantam) something of a confirmed bachelor? He lived his pointless existence of laying no eggs and siring no heirs but just eating the food he was given, until a ripe old age and a natural death. Bantams are too small for the pot.
The chickens did now and then produce young, having hidden eggs in places which we could not find. In one brood there was a runt who was both small and stupid, somehow in the end contriving to drown himself in the stream which at the height of summer was so shallow that meeting such a death must have required real effort. My father named this poor runt Bill Whitehead after a colleague of his at the University of Warwick.
This was unfair. Bill was my father's closest friend and a real novelty in liberal arts academia, that is to say a staunch conservative. He and my father used to make a great show of crossing picket lines whenever their lazy colleagues in the English department, such as Germaine Greer, actually bothered to pitch up on campus on the basis that there was a strike to support.
Born in America, Bill was so right wing that he did not wait for the draft, he volunteered for the army saying he wanted to go to Korea. His wish was denied and so, much to his disgust having wanted to kill as many commies as possible, he dodged front line action and ended up at Warwick. But he was pretty short and it was his size that meant that a dimwitted runt chicken, which was a real contender for a Darwin Award, was named after him.
There was also the cockerel who was called Andrew Bowden after the vicar of Byfield who was a celebrated collector of rare breeds of hen. I am fairly sure that he is credited with rediscovering one species that was thought to be extinct and he had a large collection up at the vicarage. These days CofE vicars have their minds on higher things such as gender equality, fighting global warming or Donald Trump and worrying what to buy their husband's for Valentine's Day. Andrew was a rather more old fashioned sort of vicar, married to a woman, believing in God and that sort of thing.
I am not sure why the cockerel was named after the vicar but my parents soon realised that cockerels were a waste of space. It was far cheaper to buy laying hens than to try to breed and anyhow Andrew Bowden did not seem terribly keen on the ladies either. Perhaps that was a sign of things to come for CofE vicars across the land. And thus one day, in the name of efficiency, my father had to wring the vicar's neck as the pot beckoned.
I was rather fond of Michelle Obama if not of her other half, President hopey change. Okay she has a range of misguided views on all sorts of things but she seems to have a sense of humour and a pleasant enough demeanour. But there were those who criticised her generating, in many cases, a stock response from the liberal left and media: racist. If it was not racism that drove attacks on Mrs hopey change it was sexism. Now many of Michelle's defenders are now on the attack against the latest Mrs Trump, the lovely Melania.
One line of attack seems to be that she is dim. Maybe this is because English is not her first language. Some of it seems driven by the idea that stunning women just can't have brains as well. And some of it seems to come from the fact that, as a model, she was paid to take some or all of her clothes off. None of this provides any evidence at all that Melania is thick but the sneering liberal elite talk condescendingly of her broken English, describe her as a "former model" and the patronising sneer and clear implied message is there. There is no way on earth that the same sort of language would have been used about Mrs Obama as that would have been sexist or racist or both.
For what it is worth the evidence is that Melania was a studious and hard working girl at High School and not at all thick - she was an over-achiever. Moreover she can hold a conversation in six languages. That, I put it to you, is something very few of her critics could manage. But perhaps her critics are not good looking women who men would like to see naked so naturally they must be cleverer than Melania. After all, for a rich liberal from a comfortable background, any woman who is paid to take her clothes off must be doing so unwillingly and is just a dim bunny being exploited. She is making a bad choice because she is thick. That is why Page Three of the Sun must be banned.
Those hard core Trump haters who the other day started tweeting #rapeMelania are of course the lowest of the low. I assume that twitter has not yet blocked them because it is too busy purging right wing tweeters like Clint Eastwood. Those new media trolls, yet to be condemned by that well known defender of rapists, oops I meant women, Hillary Clinton, are obviously disgusting. But It is the treatment of Melania by the patronising liberal elitists, as they display a predictable double standard, that I find even more nauseating.
Back in 2004 the Guardian identified Clark County Ohio as a swing district in th4e swing state of Ohio. History shows if you win Ohio you win the White House and Clark was an uber-marginal district. So the Guardian got its readers back in the UK to call up folks in Clark. You can guess what happened next.
"Hello my good man this is Jasper from Islington and that Bush fellow is a racist who does not understand why LGBT issues and global warming are the big issues in Ohio today please vote for John Kerry. There's a good chap. Power to the workers."
Sound of silence as American from flyover state wonders who this posh British tosser is and why he is talking total rubbish.
There was a 1600 vote swing to Bush in Clark giving him a landslide win in the district and helping him to land Ohio comfortably.
It is not too late for The Guardian to get its readers on the phone before November 8. Ohio looks safe for the Donald so how about the Grauniad readers work their magic in Florida or Pennsylvania? But in this new media era there is already an effort underway from Avaaz, the online grouping fighting for every duff cause on this planet. Remember Brexit?
On June 22nd Avaaz emailed its database of dim millennials urging everyone to vote Remain. It warned that if we voted leave it would mean this for the country:
It can turn away from Great Britain to become little England: small, weak, and white. But that has never been the dream of the English, or the British. It is not now the dream of any of Britain's major political parties or leaders. It is only the dream of a few populist xenophobes, buoyed by a few small minded newspaper editors and owners of the Mail and the Sun, especially Trump-loving American Rupert Murdoch, who have whipped up anti-government and anti-immigrant hysteria with lies and propaganda."
Well that was balanced and fact based. With an Avaaz campaign in overdrive in the final days of the campaign the polls did indeed move. Much to everyone's shock, Britain voted to leave.
And so to Trump, okay most Avaaz folks are in Europe but we can still help the great cause. So Avaaz warns it millenial readers of what a Trump win means. It starts with the BIG ISSUE
Trump wants to tear up the Paris climate deal, and that's just the start of his horrifying plans! But now there's a way we can all help stop him, just by texting.
Then onto the other Trump issues...
Trump and the racist, sexist, anti-climate, isolationist message he peddles is a threat to the entire world, to everything we fight for as a community. And connecting with young Americans who also care about saving our planet, and ensuring they have all the information they need to vote, can be enough to secure a vote against Trump.
So what to do: starting texting! Over to Avaaz
Tests show that one of us can make a voting plan with 30 people who share our values in just an hour -- there's no get out the vote program anywhere that has that kind of success rate!
You’ll get everything you need to jump right in through progressive group NextGen Climate -- a thorough training, a community, a support team in a chat room, and a contact list when you’re ready to get started. And because the tool doesn't use any text messages on your plan -- you send them through a web page -- you can recruit tons and tons of people at no extra cost (make sure you're super comfortable writing in fluent English though!).
Please explain to the poor kids in the inner cities and the south who will be the next lot in the front line for the army why isolationism is so much worse than sending young folks overseas to die in numerous pointless wars, the Clinton doctrine.
Go for it...Clark County goes national with the proven vote winners of Avaaz.
Bristol is the sort of left leaning City where the patronising middle classes agree with Matt Frei that ALL Trump supporterrs are racists. They agree with Hillary Clinton that anyone voting for the GOP is a "deplorable". Naturally we Brexit voters were also termed ignorant racists by the bien pensants of the South West. Put it this way: I really don't feel as if I am in my ideologocal home here.
I want to stand shoulder to shoulder with my Brexit supporting comrades in Gateshead who do not think that loving your country and wanting it to be free is something to be ashamed of. I want to link arms with God fearing, hard working, tax paying, gun owning patriots in the flyeover states as they seek to take back their country from the coastal liberal elites who have presided over a mass trabnsfer of wealth from the 99% to the 1%. And so I want to wear my Hillary for Prison T-shirt with pride.
Until today, doing so here in Bristol risked a lynching because, if the effete Bristolians looked up from their organic latte's as they read the Guardian, and saw a Trump supporter they could not hide their contempt for a "deplorable."
But as someone who wears the tag deplorable with pride I wonder if on this day, as it now seems just possible that, thanks to the heroic FBI, Hillary will indeed go to prison, is it right to "come out" as a Trumpster? Perhaps the bien pensants will accept that we deplorables were right all along and now join me in a choris of "lock her up! lock her up!"
I doubt it. So distorted are the values of the liberal elite that they would rather vote for a criminal than a conservative.
The BBC and the rest of the liberal media was creaming itself last week reporting as breaking news for several days on the trot claims by Nissan that it may cease investing in its Sunderland plant because of Brexit. That will teach those thick racists in the grim North for voting for Brexit smirked the southern liberal elite. The great unwashed have only themselves to blame. They should have listened to the London lefty millionaires from the media and academia who really knew what was best for the "ordinary people" of Britain. What the BBC and Guardian failed to report is that Nissan has form. It is the boy who cried Euro Wolf.
Roll back to 2002, when all those folks who warned us how the stockmarket, house prices and the economy would crash within weeks and that base rates would soar if we voted for Brexit on June 23, were blathering on about the Euro. Think Peter Mandelson, Paddy Pantsdown, the CBI and think Nissan.
I refer you to an article from 4 December 2002 from the Daily Telegraph:
Nissan, the Japanese carmaker, said yesterday that further investment in the UK depends on whether Britain joins the euro. Carlos Ghosn, chief executive, said the Sunderland plant, which produces the Micra and employs nearly 5,000 people, could suffer if Britain stays out of the single currency.
"The challenge is that Sunderland is producing cars with costs in pounds and most of the revenues in euros, and this is a situation we don't like." The Sunderland plant is the most efficient in Europe and a leading light of the British car industry.
Nissan had considered moving production of the Micra to a plant owned by French partners Renault, had the Government not stepped in with an aid package. Mr Ghosn, who is credited with having transformed the fortunes of Nissan, said that if Britain did not join the euro, the company could decide on "less assembly activity".
Oh... so what happened when Britain ignored the bien pensants and did not join the disaster that has been the Euro? Natch: Nissan expanded its production in Sunderland anyway. What old carlos said was a complete porky pie.
Of course producing cars in Europe where workers are keen on strikes, impossible to fire without enormous payoffs however bad trade gets or useless they are and where productivity lags that in Sunderland is still an option. But there are many reasons why Nissan won't actually take it up.
And as the BBC and its liberal pals fail to report, the trouble is that Nissan cried Euro wolf before and perhaps that is why no-one outside the media bubble of diehard Remainers believes it this time around.
Self styled financial guru Alvin Hall took to the BBC last night to explain why his fellow Americans might vote for Donald Trump - because they are either stupid or racist. It was as simple as that. What a charmer.
Hall has presumably done very well out of the asset bubbles that have ballooned under Obama. He must own shares and bonds and probably has property in a coastal City in the US. So he's all right jack and so he buys into the Clinton narrative that America is doing really well. Alvin's doing well and so all the other media folks and East coast millionaire liberals he knows are doing well so America must be doing well.
Of course those not geared to the asset bubble, folks not owning Real Estate in the coastal Cities or working in the media or cushy white collar jobs or for the State are doing badly. And that means a disproportionate number of black folks - though not Alvin. The lower and lower middle social classes are worse off in 2016 than they were in 2008 and they are angry.
Alvin insisted that it was just white folks voting Trump because The Donald was using racist "code words." Hence they are not actually phrases you and I recognise as racist but Alvin knows they are so therefore they are. If that was not the reason why folks backed Trump it was, according to Hall, because they are white trash who are just so dumb that they just feel in awe of TV celebs.
How patronising can you be? At least with the Brexit vote most of the patronising liberal elite waited until after the vote to smear 52% of the electorate as racist or thick or both. Alvin wants to get in early. Might Alvin consider tht some white folks might vote Trump for other reasons? Why, for instance, might Monica Lewinsky - branded a slut by Hillary - be considering backing the GOP? Becuase she's a racist of course. Or how about laid off workers, of all colours, sitting jobless across the rust belt and told by Hillary that America is not broken and is doing great? Can Alvin think why they might not be lining up to vote Democrat on November 8?
The fact that the polls show that Trump is the most popular Republican among black voters since 1960 and that he will get at least 33% of hispanic votes shows that vast numbers of Americans of all colours are furious about a society that sees them getting poorer while rich liberals like Alvin not only get richer but then smear the less fortunate as bigots or imbeciles when they kick up a fuss and say that they want change..
Naturally the BBC allowed Alvin a free rein for his appalling and factually challenged views. It would have been racist to have done anything else.
According to Labour Health Secretary and rentaquote lardbucket Diane Abbott the 17 million folks who voted for Brexit did so because "they wanted to see fewer foreign looking people on the streets". Brexit voter = racist. Interesting.
Just before the vote I was at a party for the 50th wedding anniversary of my wife's parents who, as it happens, were both born in India and are clearly people of colour. One thing that struck me as we chatted away was how many people in the wider family were planning to vote for Brexit. My wife voted for Brexit as did her sister. Even her husband who did not have the vote as he is Greek supported Brexit. Polls show that across the Labour heartlands large numbers of other folks of colour voted to leave.
In the simple analysis of Diane Abbott my wife, all those other folks of colour and millions of working class white Labour voters are now all racists. In fact, there are many reasons why folks voted for Brexit and there are many reasons why Labour is languishing in the polls.
I suspect that having a woman who sent her son to a selective school but wants to stop the rest of us having that opportunity via grammar schools, lecturing us all that if we don't think as she does on Europe we are all racists, is not going to reverse the erosion of Labour support. Nor will it make those 17 million people branded racists like The Mrs regret voting for Brexit.
It might however make the Mrs contemplate abandoning the party of which she is a member and which she has voted for. since she was 18 Clearly folk like her are not wanted by Labour any more.
The presents for baby with no name continue to flood in. Last week saw a box arrive from the colleagues of the Mrs who had taken time off from filling the empty minds of impressionable millennials with left wing nonsense, to send us some gifts. There were flowers and chocolates for the Mrs but nothing for me as I am a patriarchal white man who exposed himself as an evil capitalist in a lecture given to the students of the Mrs. For the baby with no name there was a balloon and a small teddy.
But Teddy Bears are, like the Mrs, meant to be brown. This bear, as you can see is white. He is therefore now known as "racist bear".
In this house that is known as irony. The worrying thing is that many of the colleagues of the Mrs would regard it as a serious and valid critique of the world of stuffed bears.
Matt started by suggesting that as a black Trump supporter the good Reverend must "feel very lonely" which the Reverend denied saying that lots of blacks supported Trump. Frei persisted, by insisting that while Trump was trying to reach out it was "not working his support is only 4%
The good Reverend Burns politely suggested that Mr Frei had his "facts" wrong. To which Mr Frei retorted "They basically think he's racist". Let's just step back for a moment and consider those few words from Matt.
What a white rich liberal from Europe is doing here is saying that "They," that is to say black folks in the USA, think Trump is racist. He is saying this to a black man from the USA who is perhaps in a better position to know how black folks in the USA actually think. And as he lectures the thick darkie, the patronising white man is basing his assertions on numbers which are simply wrong. What an offensive little bastard Frei has become.
To his credit the good Reverend Burns did not explode with what would have been a quite justifiable anger but instead stated very calmly "I know real racism" and that Donald Trump is not a racist. That rather put little Frei in his place so he changed tack asking why the racial divide in America appeared to have widened over the past eight years.
If Frei had thought about it, this rather justifies the Trump claim that blacks have "nothing to lose" by voting for him. Since 2008 the Dems have run the White House ( with a black President) and Dems have also (mis)-managed most Cities where blacks are concentrated. Yet black families are worse off now than they were in 2008. Before Frei could blame Trump for the past eight years Mark Burns suggested that the Dems might be partly to blame for this and that this is why America needed change.
Aha, Frei was straight into this. How can a white billionaire from the Upper East Side in New York help poor black folks in South Carolina. Burns was brilliant,. Hillary goes to the black churches and sings Kumbaya and promises this and that for the blacks but nothing happens. The truth is that the Dems like a solid electoral block held captive by poverty.
Burns remembers - as one suspects Frei does not - that the saintly Dr King recognised that the real enemy of black Americans was poverty. It was a poverty that affected many whites as well but disproportionately blacks. Dr King wanted to help his fellow African Americans by ending the scourge of poverty across America. He knew that #Alllivesmatter. Burns says that Trump recognises that. He knows that America isn't great ( as Hillary insists) if you are poor or working class, but that it is broken.
In promising to tackle that he offers hope to a whole swathe of society that feels that it is without hope and without friends and blacks are over-represented in that swathe. That is precisely why Trump is the most popular GOP candidate among black voters in the modern era, since 1960 and that is why his support is surging among black voters.
But of course patronising elitist liberal bastards like Matt Frei know better than the blacks themselves what is good for the blacks. Frei knows that Trump must be a racist because that is how the liberal elites view this son of an immigrant married to an immigrant. And any black who dares to support Trump just does not know what is good for them and needs to pay more attention when elitist white folks like Frei are speaking.
The weekend saw a slew of new polls and the headline is clear: Donald Trump is surging ahead of Crooked Hillary Clinton in the race to be the next President. Two weeks ago I gave eight reasons why The Donald would win HERE and things look to be on track. The real shocks, however, are in the detail, notably how Trump is surging among black voters. How can this be? Beltway liberal media pundits like Nick Bryan and, in her US stint, Emily Maitlis at the BBC and the loathsome Kylie Morris at C4 told us repeatedly that blacks hated the racist Trump. How will they spin this now?
As I pointed out in April HERE, it is not that black voters don't like Trump as he is a racist it is that they have voted Democrat en masse in the modern era. 1960 was the last time a GOP candidate, Nixon, got more than 20%. Back then there were voters whose parents were freed from slavery by a Republican (LIncoln) and in the South the Dems were the party of the white racist supremacy fighting against any form of civil rights. Thus blacks in the South voted Republican.
As a bonus for Nixon the Democrat (JFK) was of Irish origin and there was a long history of antagonism between the Irish and the blacks. It was the Irish in New York who rioted in the 1860s at the suggestion that they be forced to fight in the civil war. "We won't fight for the niggers" was the shameful view of my genetic kith and kin. All of this allowed Nixon to secure 35% of the non white vote but he lost anyway. The 1960s changed America as Democrats from the North led the fight for civil rights and by 1968 Dixiecrats (Southern white Dems) had transitioned via independent (Governor Wallace) and into the Republican fold. Southern blacks headed the other way and the black vote was thereafter a gimme for the Dems.
The highest black vote since Nixon was Bush Senior in 1988. At that point all non-whites were lumped together and hispanics tend to be less Democrat than blacks so the 18% for George might actually flatter his support among blacks.
Since 2000 when polling split black and hispanic voters the best performance among blacks was 7% for Bush junior in 2004. The average has been just 4%. But now comes the LA Times poll showing The Donald at 20.1% among black voters and with his support increasing rapidly. If Trump maintains this until the General Election he will be the most popular Republican candidate among black Americans for 56 years. Explain that one Kylie Morris.
Blacks have been vote fodder for liberals like Clinton for years. But they remain poorer, more likely to die young and far more likely to go to jail or to be executed for murder than are whites. Democrat "patronage" has done nothing for them at all. The asset bubbles since 2008 has made rich folk on the coasts and in Chicago richer and richer. Poor folk - and that means disproportionate numbers of blacks - have got poorer. The young men and women who have been sent abroad to die in the folly of foreign wars by folks like Hillary Clinton are overwhelmingly black. Hillary has form as a warmongerer and insists American is doing brilliantly. Trump is not going to send troops abroad to die pointlessly and he says America is broken and needs mending. As such is it any surprise that he appeals to black voters in a way no GOP candidate has done before in the modern era. The Clinton message just does not ring true for many blacks and, oddly, that of Trump does.
Sure the professional hate mongers of the Dem establishment will lambast Trump. Jesse Jackson, Oprah and Al Sharpton will call him a racist right up to the wire and the liberal media will air their calls to the ghettos to stick with Crooked Hillary. But it won't work. The son of an immigrant and husband of an immigrant, Trump will win and - as I noted two weeks ago - one reason is his incredibly appeal, for a Republican, to black voters.
in 2012 the country club Republican Mitt Romney got 5% of the black vote. As things stand The Donald is going to get a massive swing his way in this part of the community. Will the liberal media report this now? Over to you Kylie. And how will Kylie, Nick & Emily explain it?
Like Labour front bencher Emily Thornberry, our morbidly obese three legged cat Oakley is terrified of actually meeting a member of the working classes. Thus when a man fixing the bathroom wanders in or the cleaners arrive, as soon as they start speaking Polish he bolts and hides. Maybe Oakley is a racist and does not like Poles? Actually It is not that they are speaking Polish as on the odd occassion we have found Brits who will eschew welfare to work for £12 an hour, he also runs, especially when he hears a hoover revving up.
It is not that he is scared of people. When we have guests, even the mother-in-law who visits tomorrow for an extended stay, he is most affectionate. But when a member of the working classes crosses our thresh-hold, Oakley runs upstairs into a bedroom and buries himself under a duvet. He will only emerge when the house is once again free of the working classes.
I wonder why he became such a snob? I suspect it is the middle class Guardian reading public sector employed pals of the Mrs teaching him bad habits. "Oakley watch out there is a white van pulling up outside! Run...he has a real job and might vote Tory! " Meanwhile No 1 friend of Oakley, Mu, who is a novelty among the friends of the Mrs in that she actually has a job in the productive part of the economy, is still acting like a crazed Millennial and playing Pokemon Go on a daily basis. And on her last visit she once again detected a Pokemon above Oakley. He was, as you can see, not impressed.
One of the leaders of BLM in the UK is Natalie Jeffers who is the sole employee and shareholder of MattersoftheEarth Ltd a company set up in 2012 which neglected to file accounts for two years and was almost struck off but which now makes a tiny profit and has net cash...thanks to you the grateful taxpayer. You see the Department for International Development gave Miss Jeffers' company £50,000 in 2015 to run a programme tackling issues of "gender-sensitive governance" in Nigeria. By October 31 2015 just £9,534 was left on the balance sheet so where did the other £40,466 (plus £5,109 left over from 2015) so call it £45,575 go? Has anyone asked for an audit of where it went and if not why not?
MattersoftheEarth says that it tries to bridge 'the gap between the academic and creative worlds." FFS.
You really could not make thiis rubbish up. But it gets better. Miss Jeffers missed last week's BLM protest at London City airport where all the protesters were in fact white folks, angry guilty millenial liberals who are affluent enough not to have to do a proper job. Ms Jeffers was elsewhere at a feminist conference at the luxury Costa do Sauipe resort in Brazil.
Her trip will have caused over 3 tonnes of carbon to be consumed but since man made global warming is a myth I don't really care about that although one might note the startling hypocrsiy of Jeffers.
What I note is that a cash strapped Government running a vast deficit is spening taxpayers cash on such obvious crap. Ms Jeffers will no doubt say that Priti Patel is racist when she scraps this funding but my challenge to Priti is to ask what other daft programmes is her department funding? I note that one official in that department described this programme as "small scale".
Fifty grand may be small scale to him but to many of us it seems quite a lot to be wasted in such an obvious way. Ms Patel should start her work by sacking this employee who regards spending £50,000 of other people's money as small beer. Anyone with such a casual disgregard for the wasting of cash, which you and I have had extracted from wages we have laboured hard to generate, is not fit for purpose. Then Perhaps Miss Patel might proactively took at which other daft companies and fake Charities her department is supporting.
It is incidents like this that make one despair of a decadent West with its bloated Governments, sucking the private sector dry to fund such pointless activity. This will not be a one off, far from it. As you wake up to go to work tomorrow think what good works your taxes fund. Think of Miss Jeffers at her conference at a luxury beach resort in Brazil. Think of some civil servant in Priti Patel's department who thinks fifty grand is small beer and who actually thought that this was money well spent who will not be fired but will get a flat rate inflation beating pay rise this year and every year as he works towards a gilt edged pension.
And the establishment wonders why so many of us are so angry?
Mr Arnold Mballe Sub, his Mrs and eight kids moved from France to Luton in 2012 so that he could study to be a mental health nurse at the University of Bedforshire with the NHS picking up the £27,000 fee for the course. Neither Arnold or his Mrs work, they are currently housed in a three bedroom house. Before that they clocked up a bill of £38,400 staying in a hotel for four months. Actually it was worse. The family ordered hotel meals of £21,000 and then refused to pay leaving the Council to foot that bill as well. Chuck in benefits and this lot have cost the taxpayer £103,000 in the past year. It gets worse.
The family want a larger house which, natch, will be paid for by the State. They have been offered several five bed houses which might see some of the brats having to share but they are young so that should be okay. But apparently that would not have enough storage space so the family want more and they want it now. They accuse the State of leaving them feeling "neglected. At this point you and I might start to use the words "ungrateful parasites."
We all know that these spongers will get a larger house. They will be a lifelong drain on a State funded by hard working taxpayers and taking up nil cost accommodation in an area with a housing shortage. The British taxpayer has to pay for a French family. At every level you can see this is wrong. What on earth was the NHS, which is always bleating on about how underfunded it is, thinking when it organised this bonkers arrangement?
For years the media and political establishment has cried "racist" when anyone questions immigration or open borders with full welfare entitlements within the EU. When cases like this one crop up, time and time again we are assured that they are "one-offs". We all know that there are vast numbers of such "one-offs" but to express that view is racist so we can't say a thing.
I do not blame Arnold for a second. He has spotted that there is a flawed system and is quite legitimately milking it for all he can get. Don't blame Arnold blame the system.
And above all blame a political and media class which does not suffer any of the consequences of this structural insanity, that is for ordinary taxpayers, and has united in smearing anyone stupid enough to point out what was actually happening. it is the elite that created Arnold and his family and that elite still does not see the error if its ways, merely innate evil in anyone who raises a criticism of anything to do with immigration.
The oily old windbag has a history of sinning normally in the cash for favours department and in any normal job would have been fired years ago. But Vaz is an MP. And so yesterday he stood down from the Commons Home Affairs committee which he chaired. Naturally he said that he was doing so "for the sake of the committee"" not for himself you understand, Vaz makes this noble sacrifice for others because he cares. What a saint.
And naturally his fellow MPs on the committee lined up to praise the sacrifice of this respected figure and towering statesman. What planet are they on? Outside the Westminster bubble we see Vaz for what he is: a chancer, a rogue and a sleazy hypocrite who wants drugs (poppers and coke) and prostitution to be illegal while enjoying those secret pleasures himself. One might wonder if his fellow MPs have anything to hide? Once again the political class unites across party lines to look after one of their own and show themselves to be out of touch.
As for Vaz, he has no shame. He remains an MP and sits on Labour's NEC. He is not standing down from the NEC or as an MP. No doubt he expects that after serving a short period of penance he will, as before, bounce back. Meanwhile he will carry on earning a vast salary as an MP which you and I as taxpayers provide, engaging in curious property trading as a sideline while denouncing as many people as possible for being racists in his unofficial role as the witch-finder general of the racism industry.
Oddly, Vaz and his fellow MPs wonder why 99% of the population view everyone inside the Westminster political and media bubble with complete contempt? This is the Vaz who despite living 37 minutes from Parliament in a multi million pound family home claimed expenses for a flat in Westminster. Now we have some idea why he needed that second address.
It is the taxpayer who has supported the lavish lifestyle of Vaz for many years and who will quite clearly continue to do so. What is the only difference between the British taxpayer and Mr Vaz's rent boy friends? They get paid by Vaz to take it up the arse. We have to pay for the privilege.
Vaz has been caught on tape so appears to be slam dunk guilty of offering to buy illegal drugs and of paying male prostitutes for sex. Given that the committee he chairs is producing reports on prostitution right now and that he has spoken in debates at sleaze central on drugs he is guilty not only of a crime ( offering to buy illegal drugs) but of what we in the private sector term "an undeclared conflict of interest (COI)"
As a libertarian I would legalise both drugs and prostitution so in my world Vaz would be in the clear but sadly the lawmakers of Westminster, step forward Keith Vaz, do not see it that way. But hypocrisy is not a sacking offence anywhere. Undeclared COIs and breaking the law are, in the private sector at least.
If a senior employee of a firm in the private sector faced such a rap sheet he would, after a fair but quick enquiry, given that the facts here are on tape and clear, be fired. Luckily for Vaz he might step down as a Committee Chair but he will remain an MP and he can make a comeback. Just like he did last time. You see he has form, lots of it.
Back in 2001 Vaz was caught out big time. He lobbied for some very dodgy fellows, the Hinduja brothers, to get British passports. he not only failed to declare that the dodgy Brothers had paid over cash to his wife's firm but blocked enquiries into that matter. Actually that is not the only Vaz scandal. Try googling Eileen Eggington or Sarosh Zaiwalla. Predictably, Vaz was quick to accuse anyone who challenged the sleazy MP of being a racist. The racists they are everywhere in the world of Vaz. In the private sector the Eggington scandal ( making false accusations to the Police against an innocent woman to hide your own crimes, notably taking more gifts from the Hindujas), the Zaiwalla affair ( more backhanders) and the Hinduja affair would be career ending. We wicked capitalists just cannot take backhanders for favours or go about smearing folkjs to the filth to cover up our crimes and expect to get away with it if caught.
But Vaz got the odd slap on the wrist but no career ending sanction. And that is always the way in the public sector. Baby P, or that kid up in Scotland murdered by his Lesbian parents, die. But are any social workers fired. Mid Staffs happens but who was fired? There is no penalty in the public sector for incompetency and very rarely any penalty for crime.
Malcolm Bradbury had the public sector nailed in his classic book about University Life, the History Man. Our hero, radical marxist sociology lecturer Howard Kirk explains that however useless and corrupt he is, he is almost unsackable. Indeed the only offence for which he can be sacked is "gross moral turpitude" which he defines to a female student of his as "raping large numbers of nuns." Merely taking cash for favours, lying to Parliamentary watchdogs, smearing Policewomen, hiring rent boys, paying for drugs or for that matter allowing Baby P and all those folks in Mid Staffs to get murdered is simply not serious enough to be considered gross moral turpitude and to warrant a sacking the public sector.
With no penalty for anything be it life threatening or just something that results in even more taxpayers' cash being wasted, the public sector meanders on: unaccountable, incompetent and, at its worst, venal and corrupt. Back in the private sector we wicked capitalists live to a higher standard as we slave away to generate the cash needed to fund the Augean Stables run by the State.
I used to have a girlfriend from India who arrived in this country convinced that the entire British establishment and anyone who went to a public school (with the exception of myself, naturally) were closet homoseexuals. If she is reading the tabloid press today she will no doubt be concluding that she was right all along.
First there is the Bishop of Grantham, the small Lincolnshire town which was the birthplace of our greatest ever Prime Minister, the blessed Lady Thatcher. Nicholas Chamberlain was about to be "outed" by a Sunday tabloid so instead went and spilled the beans to sympathetic hacks at the Guardian. Supporters say that he is "brave" to come out, I wonder had he done so without being pushed if that might have been a bit more brave. According to Justin Welby, the hopeless Archbishop of Canterbury who has known about this for ages, Bishop Nicholas is in a "long-term and committed relationship." The Bishop himself says that he obeys Church guidelines which is to say that he is "celibate".
Okay so he is in a long term relationship with someone and completely abstains from all sexual relations. Really? All? Does snogging count? It is sexual after all. This all sounds terribly frustrating for both parties.Is everyone being completely honest about what is going on here? Frankly I don't really care, I just assume that a large number of vicars and Bishops in the pathetic and increasingly irrelevant omnishambles that is the CofE are gay.
I see that gay blogger Paul Scott lashed out at the conservative forces within the Church who have a problem with bishop Chamblerlain. Scott asks if it is any wonder that young people are not interested in the Church given such bigotry. Paul is wrong. I suspect that religious studies are not high on his agenda. The parts of the CofE that are growing and growing fast, attracting both young and old, are the conservative evangelical churches that do disapprove of Bishop Nicholas strongly. Paul, head along to Holy Trinity Brompton or one of its many Alpha Course offshoots and check out the stacks of young folk there. Actually don't, there is a danger they might convert you into a celibate moralist and all round bore and and I prefer you just as you are.
The rest of the C of E is indeed failing to attract the young and is shrinking as its elderly congregation heads to a better place. But the rest of the CofE is muddled. So it thinks that Bishop Nicholas is brave in that he outs himself only when threatened with outing. And it thinks he is in a long term relationship. And it thinks he is totally celibate too. It welcomes gay people into its flock. Frankly it welcomes anyone it can get to join its thinning ranks. That part of the Church is muddled at all levels.
The big problem faced by the part of the CofE that Paul Scott admires, is that since it stands for nothing at all no-one of any age can see a real point in joining a flock of believers who cant decide what they believe in. The evangelicals may hold values which both Paul Scott and I would condemn but they do believe in their values passionately and that will always attract some folks to the flag.
Meanwhile senior Labour MP Keith Vaz had had to stand down as chairman of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee because he was having affairs at the home he normally shares with his Mrs. It seems Vaz paid two Polish rent boys for sex, begged for "popper" drugs, tried to get an all male foursome arranged and boasted about having unprotected sex. Mr Vaz was recorded and appears to offer to pay for the coke the hookers were using. Vaz claims that this is all a sting.
Yeah whatever. Vaz has so much form when it comes to being less than economical with the truth over a number of matters that I would not believe him if he told me that 2+2 =4. Or perhaps that would be 3 rentboys + 1 MP = 4 men sharing bodily fluids.
I see that at one point in this encounter Vaz is on tape asking if a third rent boy who is on the way speaks English. Bloody hell if Vaz had discovered any other employer asking that sort of question of a potential hire at any point in the past thirty years he would have been in front of a camera within minutes to scream "racist!"
That after years of scandal, this low life is still viewed as one of our most respected Parliamentarians shows what a cesspit Westminster is and how right we, the plebs, are to view all who work there with contempt. I do not view Vaz with contempt because he might bat for both sides but for more or less everything else he has achieved in the house of sleaze.
If Vaz is looking for a defence I note that his Committee is currently producing a report on prostitution. Surely we should commend Vaz for taking his work home with him and for being prepared to put in late night shifts getting to grip with the subject matter with first hand research? Well done Keith, I applaud your dedication to the job.
Clint Eastwood is today smeared by the Guardian and the rest of the liberal press as an apologist for racism. His real crime in the eyes of the metropolitan elite is, of course, that not only is he a Republican but that he says he will vote for Donald Trump over crooked Hillary Clinton in November. If you are guilty of such a crime, being an evil conservative, all else flows naturally including, in the liberal mind, a good chance that you are a racist.
The Guardian leads with the headline "Clint Eastwood defends Trump's 'racist' remarks: 'Just get over it' Note where the 'quote' marks are.
On the subject of Clint's racism it quotes from a passage in an interview Clint gave this week in Esquire Magazine. The tax dodging Guardian states:
“He’s said a lot of dumb things,” the actor and director said of the man who has pilloried Mexicans, Muslims, immigrants, women, and the list goes on and on. “So have all of them. Both sides. But everybody – the press and everybody’s going, ‘Oh, well, that’s racist’, and they’re making a big hoodoo out of it”. Eastwood’s advice to America: “Just fucking get over it. It’s a sad time in history”
Now let's read what Clint actually said, in the interview, in its full context. The way the Guardian quotes selectively at the top of the story does not read that well for Clint. But the actual section in Esquire runs:
ESQ: What do you think Trump is onto? CE: What Trump is onto is he's just saying what's on his mind. And sometimes it's not so good. And sometimes it's … I mean, I can understand where he's coming from, but I don't always agree with it. ESQ: So you're not endorsing him? CE: I haven't endorsed anybody. I haven't talked to Trump. I haven't talked to anybody. You know, he's a racist now because he's talked about this judge. And yeah, it's a dumb thing to say. I mean, to predicate your opinion on the fact that the guy was born to Mexican parents or something. He's said a lot of dumb things. So have all of them. Both sides. But everybody—the press and everybody's going, "Oh, well, that's racist," and they're making a big hoodoo out of it. Just fucking get over it. It's a sad time in history.
That is a bit different is it not. The now closed Trump University faced a fraud charge. The Judge was Mexican. Trump stated that he felt that given his comments on Mexican immigratiomn the judge might not be impartial. Clint thinks that was dumb (he's correct) but racist? It is not racist, it is not viewing Mexican Americans as inferior or differently it is just a dumb comment about judicial impartiality. One might note that when liberals make similar comments - notably in applauding the way OJ Simpson wanted his murder trial in an area where most jurors would be black - that is NOT racist or dumb at all.
The Guardian headline would have you believe that everyone (including Clint) acccepts that Trump's remarks are racist. Clint is not discussing all the controversial remarks Trump has made - the Guardian injects that into the narrative but does it so smoothly that it suggests Clint brings it in. And Clint is not, as the Guardian headline implies, either accepting that the one remark he discusses on race matters in the interview was racist and he is not, in fact, defending it at all.
As such the Guardian headline and editorial on this matter is grossly misleading and unfair on poor old Clint. As to why Clint backs Trump the quotes are clear: Eastwood told Esquire that if he had to pick between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump,
“I’d have to go for Trump." “You know, 'cause she's declared that she's gonna follow in Obama's footsteps. There's been just too much funny business on both sides of the aisle. She's made a lot of dough out of being a politician." “He's just saying what's on his mind,” Eastwood told Esquire. "And sometimes it's not so good. And sometimes it's … I mean, I can understand where he's coming from, but I don't always agree with it." “Secretly everybody's getting tired of political correctness, kissing up. That's the kiss-ass generation we're in right now. Everybody’s walking on eggshells. We see people accusing people of being racist and all kinds of stuff. When I grew up, those things weren't called racist."
Leaving the grotesque slander on Clint and the deceptive way the Guardian filters its own words into Clint's quotes which really is appallingly unprofessional, who do you think most ordinary Americans will agree with?
That is if they see the full interview, rather than the slanted smears of the liberal press, will they back Clint or some ivy league educated privileged rich coast living liberal journalist?
I hate to admit it but I really like Michelle Obama. I do not normally go for left wing women, other than my wife and Abbe, who broke my teenage heart before becoming a lesbian, but Michelle is not only not bad looking but she also comes over as funny (very unusual among those on the left) and a warm sort of human being. I really can't say a bad word about her other than that she is married to the ghastly President hopey change. Yet the idea that her speech at the Democratic convention was transformational and inspiring was just another liberal media piece of fiction.
Talk of how slaves built the house where Michelle now lives will have enthused white liberals who mainline on guilt about the time before a Republican President ended slavery. It will have appealed to black voters, whose mood is justifiably angry after recent shootings, but last time around 98% of them voted Dem anyway. That block is largely in the bag.
Then there wasa claim about Hillary Clinton was making it possible for a woman to be President. There will be some hardline feminists who will buy into that. But against a pro life Republican, given how many negatives there are about Hillary that claim was a bit OTT. How many women must wish that the first woman running for President was anyone other than Hillary? But heck the liberal media bought Michelle's line anyway.
Then there was the attack on those who dare to say that American is not great, i.e. Donald Trump. If you are in the liberal media America is great. Your house or condo in New York, DC or LA has soared in value as has your portfolio of stocks. Your job is not being exported, you feel rich, oooh do order me an extra skinny organic latte with a twist of fair trade cinnamon please. And there is no chance that your kids will see the only way out as joining the army only to return home in a body bag or with their legs missing. Sure Michelle, rich liberals at the convention or in the media think that America is great. Yeah make that a low fat, gluten free, organic damson and mulberry muffin made with ingredients from the workers co-operative in Nicaragua.
But vast numbers of your fellow citizens live in a different America and it is a dark place for all the reasons you are just not experiencing..And those citizens are listening to a man who seems to realise that or at least claims to realise that and talks about it. And that is why The Donald is streets ahead among white working class folks, in the flyover states and will also score better among black voters than any Republican in 30 years - however many times the liberals smear him as a racist. Don't tell the liberals but a lot of black voters are aspirational and do not want to live in a ghetto in the warm and dependent embrace of an ever bigger state.
After the speech Clinton got a brief and tiny bounce in the polls as folks were told by the liberal media that Michelle had delivered an inspirational speech. Then they listened to the actual speech and they realised that media had just lied again, the status quo class just hugged each other and shouted out values many in American loathe more with every day that goes by. America also reflected that while Michelle is lovely, come the fall the Dem they will have to vote for is the charmless and dishonest crooked Hillary. And so three days into the convention Hillary's poll ratings are even worse than at the start of the show - she trails Trump not by 4 but by 7 points.
The liberal media screams "that was not meant to happen". Michelle was inspirational. Mad Bernie is onside and we are united. Conventions always see a poll bounce as folks get to know more about the candidate. The trouble is that the more folks got to know about Trump and his charming Mrs last week, the more they liked them - despite what the media said. The more folks get to learn about crooked Hillary and her co-conspirators in the DNC this week the more they mistrust and dislike them.
And that ain't going to change. Hillary and the media gushed today about glass ceilings being broken and history being made. In real America no-one cares. Hillary is a charmless woman who no-one trusts and what will keep her out of the White House is not a glass ceiling but the fact that she is a crook leading an out of touch party.
Having done their best to cover up the gang rapes and sex attacks in Cologne on New Year's Eve, I cannot see why anyone believes a word the German rozzers have to say on anything. After Ansbach I am going to double up on that assertion. One thing the German Plod is good at is ordering us not to speculate. It sends out tweets after each atrocity ordering us not to be so reckless. Good Germans obey orders, but the Police are keen to do the opposite and speculate about anything other than what we all knew to be the truth in the first place.
And so with the Ansbach suicide bomb we progressed thus: gas explosion, bomb, victim a Moslem immigrant, suicide bomb, killer (still a victim at the BBC) not an islamist just had psychiatric issues and happened by pure chance to be a Moslem, not an islamist just happened to be a Moslem but a lone wolf and then...today it turns out that he had pledged allegiance to ISIS after all.
Finally Plod admits the ghastly truth. Up to a few hours before we got to stage three the BBC could happily say it was not terrorism and could even speculate about right wing extremists. Now we have confirmed as the truth what most folks suspected all along about Ansbach . Now we can ask fair questions about the culprit was let into Germany and why - having had his asylum claims rejected, he was not booted out. After four acts of terror in Germany in less than a week, all committed by Moslems, is there a common link we might examine? Er.....
Will the BBC, the German rozzers, the Guardian and other deluded lefties finally accept that the statement below is not a racist remark but a statement of fact:
"Almost all Moslems will never wish to commit an act of terror in Europe. Almost all acts of terror in Europe are being committed by Moslems."
Two more lone wolves struck in Germany tonight - a bloke with a machete killed two folks. The pertinent facts here according to the liberal media were that he was pinned down by a Moslem and that one of his victims was an immigrant, a Pole. Then in Ansbach a man denied entrance to a 2000 person music festival blew himself up injuring ten people outside a wine bar. The BBC wants us to know both are lone wolves. So was the killer of nine in Munich on Friday night and the chap with the axe earlier last week. All lone wolves. Meanwhile...
The chap who killed Labour MP Jo Cox may have acted alone and was clearly 100% bonkers but he was a right wing extremist. So said the liberal press and especially the BBC. Not only was he right wing but he was driven to act by politicians who raised concerns about immigration. He was never described as a lone wolf.
There is, of course, one common link between all four killers or wannabee killers: they are all Moslems. Okay I am jumping the gun on the Ansbach bomber but I reckon the odds on him being Jewish or a Mormon are going to be fairly long. Whilst the vast majority Muslims do not aspire to be mass murderers, the majority of crazed mass killers or wannabee killers these days do appear to be Moslems. But in making that observation the BBC would no doubt regard me as a racist or bigot. That is what you get these days for stating what is simply a fact.
The German Police also seem reluctant to accept that it seems to have a bit of a problem with these Moslem lone wolves. Just as it did not wish to accept that there had been a spot of bother on New Year's Eve in Cologne with the groping and raping. The rozzers can demand that we do not engage in speculation about all these lone wolves and some Germans will be good Germans and obey those orders. But increasing numbers will not.
In this country the BBC can decline to join up the dots but folks are not thick either. Across Europe the more attacks that occur which are carried out by folks who are to be Moslem the more terrified the rest of society - and that includes the majority of Moslems who are law abiding souls - will become.
And for the establishment and the liberal media just to deny the links, to deny that there is a problem and to continue behaving with unchanged policies as if there is no problem will simply turn that fear to anger. If you want to fuel racism in Europe, the "denial" of the media and the authorities of facts we can all see with our own eyes is the right way to go about it.
PS. The bomb was carried inside a backpack. Clearly our streets will not be safe until the liberal political class acts. Ban backpacks now before anyone else is killed.
Emily Maitlis of the BBC is covering the Republican Convention in Cleveland and so for her first report she tried, very briefly, to show balance but then gave up. She knows that Trump supporters are all ignorant common folks from the flyover states who are likely to be racists, because she is an educated affluent liberal. From that standpoint the report was very simple to put together.
First go meet some Trump supporters. How about a "Demolition Derby" meeting where rednecks crash banged up cars into each other. Brilliant. You could hear the disdain as Maitlis informer us that these idiots pronounced it Derby ( to rhyme with HER-BE) as opposed to Derby (to rhyme with BAR-BE). What fucking imbeciles are Americans and especially Republican Americans.
Emily seems to have found it hard to see the appeal of this sport but was delighted to find very few black folk watching and one car decorated with the Southern cross, the old flag of Dixie. Okay it was only one car and in rural Ohio there are very few black folks at all but who cares? These folks at the Derby must all be immigrant hating racists. Emily had made her point.
First up was a fairly articulate Democrat who said what a bad man Trump was. He was interviewed twice. Great... he must have been representative of about 1 % of the crowd but let's show balance and have a Dem as well as a Republican. Next up was a chap who happily admitted on camera he did not know anything about politics but was backing Trump. He, predictably, sounded daft as a brush. So that was balance: clever folks vote Dem and having found the thickest person in the MidWest who was a fan of the Donald we could all see that Trump backers were congenital idiots.
Next off to Cleveland where various of the articulate middle class liberals protesting against Trump outside the Convention were interviewed. Lots of black folks, lots of gays and all explained in an articulate manner why the Donald was a racist, sexist, generally horrible piece of work. Of course these are the sort of professional uber-liberal protesters who would have said pretty much the same about whoever the GOP had picked and who think the sun shines out of the arse of crooked Hillary. But that is not the point. Maitlis had showed you that clever folks think Trump is a ghastly bigot.
A report on how folks in a reasonably balanced state like Ohio view the convention of the GOP thus interviewed four clever liberals who loathe Trump and can explain why he is awful in an articulate manner and one bloke who admits that he is a congenital idiot and is voting for Trump.
One kind of suspects that this is not really representative of how Ohio thinks and how it will vote in the fall. But that is not the point. Maitlis and the liberal elite really do think that clever folks are liberals and that we conservatives are just vile bigoted untermenschen and all reports must reflect not facts or balance but just that simple liberal world view.
Forced to pay for this bias and the bloated salaries of folks such as Ms Maitlis via the regressive poll tax that is the license fee I am naturally once again delighted with the output of Britain's TV Pravda.
As I am with my father in Shipston the paper delivered each day is the Guardian and my father is delighting in reading out various excerpts just to annoy me. Since he is a closet reactionary they also make him despair but he has been well trained by my step mother, who actually agrees with much of this nonsense, to hide that despair. That is until he gets to the White Bear where he can read the Daily Telegraph and smile in open agreement.
On page 33 of the Guardian there is a section where a history teacher who blogs as "disappointed idealist" offers hints on what to tell your kids in school if they ask awkward questions. Today the teacher answers the question that all the kids are apparently asking about Brexit, "are all leave voters racist?" The answer:
Not at all, But all racists were almost certainly leave voters. Although as racists aren't generally the brightest sparks there is always a chance they crossed the wrong box"
How predictable. That Anjem Choudary, the Islamic hate preacher who supporets ISIS was as a keen backer of Remain as he is of killing the Jews. I reckon he's a racist but for many Guardian readers, such as Mr Livingstone and his followers, anti-semitism is an acceptable form of racism so maybe I have got that a bit wrong.
The wicked Jews are I gather fair game for lefties these days. This is a discussion about what the Guardian terms real racism. There is of course aboslutely no hard data showing that all racists (apart from Anjem who doesnt count as he only hates the Jews) were leave voters but what does that matter for teachers?
It bloody well should do. Telling kids something as a fact when you have only very limited anecdotal evidence as opposed to comrehesive hard data is just not very...professional. Or it did not use to be.
I blog in my own name but am this morning a truly "disappointed taxpayer". I am sorely disapponted that my taxes are paying bigots like this to fill the heads of young people with such palpable crap.
As the earnest young people, mostly loathsome students, gather in London today they claim that they march for Europe. it sounds good to be an internationalist showing solidarity with a whole continent. MarchfortheEU does not sound quite so good. The EU is after all, as even its supporters in the remain campaign admitted, inefficient, corrupt and far from perfect. Moreover it is loathed across the continent.
Switzerland has just withdrawn its application to join. In France, Austria, Greece, Italy, Holland, Sweden and Denmark there are growing calls for their own referendum and signs that in many of those countries folks will vote to leave. For what these young people fail to see is that across Europe there is a widespread feeling that the EU serves an business, bankster, media and political establishment very well but for the ordinary Joe, for the 99% it sucks.
Here in Greece, youth unemployment is 60%. It would be far higher but for the mass emigration of our young people to places where there are jobs. Pensioners now have to live on £9 a day. And that is down to the EU and scorched earth economic policies imposed on this country. Can the young folks in London imagine living in a place where only 2 in 10 young folks can find work without having to emigrate? Are they really supportive of an institution that has caused such wholesale misery to the people of the Hellenic Republic but also to poor Spaniards, Italians and others? Are they marching in support of the body that has completey buggered Greece and its people?
The middle class young people are so blinkrered and ignorant that they fail to see the revulsion at the EU across Europe. What they also appear to fail to understand is democracy. In the biggest popular poll in British history we voted to leave the EU. We Brexiteers won and the 40,000 need to get over it. Moreover, not only did we win the vote, history has already shown that the campaign run by Dodgy Dave Cameron and the former drug dealer Will Straw was fundamentally dishonest. It was based on lies.
We were told that Brexit would lead to thre stockmarket falling by 20%. It has risen. We were told it would cause interest rates to rise. The lying scumbag Mark Carney, who should be sacked as he Governor of he Bank of England for his part in Project Fear, has now admitted that this is not going to happen and indeed the next move in rates is likely to be a fall. We were told that companies such as HSBC would relocate. They have said they were staiyng. Banks like JP Morgan, or was it Morgan Stanley, said there would be mass layoffs at once. There have been none. We were told food would be more sharply expensive to buy. It is not.
We the people were told lie after lie after lie by a campaign run by the establishment for the establishment. Goldman Sachs bankrolled the drug dealer Straw's efforts in the Remain campaign. Of course, "Straw the Draw" as he wa sknown at school, only has a career because he is the son of the war criminal Jack. That is how the establishment looks after its own. Big business claimed (wrongly) it spoke for all businesses. BT told its staff how to vote. Dodgy Dave used taxpayers cash to publish more lies.
But the people of Britain saw through all of this and voted for Brexit. So now Remainers need new lies as the old ones were shown to be lies. So we are now told that Brexit won because it apealed to racists or because people were too stupid to understand the issues. Not content with smearing the leaders of the campaign as they did prior to June 23 and Independence Day, now supporters of Remain are happy to smear 52% of the population, 17 million of their fellow Britons.
The silly young people today will insist that the 17 million are just insular little Englanders. Au contraire. Many of us want to be global citizens. It is wonderful to see countries such as New Zealand and Australia and even the US ( despite what Obama threatened) who have failed to do trade deals with fortress Europe rushing to do deals with Britain as it prepares for freedom. We can be part of a free trading free spirited world community, able to import food from Africa without the tarfiffs the EU imposed to keep Africans in poverty and to push up the cost of food in Europe.
We can decide who we let into the UK: those with skills we want and those really fleeing persecution not just those who will come to force down wages for the lowest paid or who like our generous benefits. In the new era we will let in more deserving people with darker skins and few underserving ones with white skins. That is called being a really good global citizen, it is anything but racist.
And that desire to be a global citizen, rather than a servant of the inward looking decaying EU project, is shared by many of our fellow Europeans. The banksters at Goldman, big business, the BBC and the war criminal Blair may prefer life inside fortress EU but across Europe folks want to escape as we have just done. They yearn for their own vote, for democracy, for the people being able to tell the establishment what to do and not the other way round.
But 40,000 silly young people don't support democracy. Todya they are not marching for Europe. They are mnarching for a political construct that serves the interests only of the establishment. And they are marching against democracy.
Maybe it is just a feature of getting older but whenever I read about more or less anything to do with students and politics I find myself thinking that we should bring back National Service is a prerequisite for those wishing to study for a degree. Of course National Service was something I dodged by about thirty years, but when I was a student only 10% of folks went to university. We were - with a few exceptions - an elite. These days almost half of young folks go to what are, in many cases, laughably called Universities and it seems that large numbers of students are pathetic, idle or stupid or all three.
The leader of Britian's students, Malia Bouattia is a 28 year old perma-student fanatic who has featured here before as a supporter oif ISIS and fanatical Jew hater. The other day she told the world that Tory cuts to higher education (regrettably there have been none) were driving students to join ISIS. She is a barking mad fanatic but the fact that she was elected as head of the National Union of Students shows just how many students live in a parallel universe based on discredited ideas and a sense of entitlement.
Post the Brexit vote, in which only 30% of those between 18 and 25 could be bothered to get of their arse and put a cross in a box, the outpourings of grief from the young people who are "working" their way through the University system have been a hoot.
A thread on the student chat room ( stop chatting and get back to your studies you lazy fuckers) "The Student Room" entitled "Does anyone else feel genuinely depressed about Brexit?' is, it seems, humming. Comments include:
'I've felt so down all day because of this, and just have this constant sick feeling in my stomach.
'I genuinely feel like I'm grieving. I feel like I'm grieving for our growing economy (slow but steady). I'm grieving for our loss of cultural enrichment.'
'Took about an hour for my hands to stop shaking, and for my knees to return to some semblance of working order after I saw the result.'
"I have felt sick all day, and ashamed. And angry, with special little peaks of rage dedicated to the claptrap by degrees either ignorant, racist or both, that leavers have peddled as their "reasons".'
"Can I class Brexit as a traumatic event when fail my exams next week? Because honestly I'm so distracted now because of it."
"II wonder if I can get special consideration for my Further Maths and Physics exams today because I was stressed about Brexit?'
Hmmmm, so we leavers were all ignorant racists while the intelligentsia preparing to get a 2:1 in a joint course in media studies and basket weaving are now traumatised by the whole event. Whatever. Perhaps they should all be given counselling?
But who from? A lefty academic well known to me, who actually voted to leave, reports back that her facebook stream is unremittingly gloomy. Natch nearly all her facebook pals are also lefty academics and all are gloomy and also lashing out with the narrative that leave voters were ignorant and racist and that the world is going to end. Such is the violence of the "groupthink" on this that this individual has not dared to fess up to a single friend in academia that she voted to leave, lest she be branded a racist too. Or just thick. Or both. She just sits and listens as they rant on for they cannot consider the idea that the she voted to leave. They assume because of her job that she is part of the group think.
At the "victory" party the same person attended on the night of the 2015 General Election as the results started to filter in there was a similar shock among these lefty academics. They could not believe what was happening because, as one put it, "I don't know anyone who voted Tory."
British academia has been expanded massively in the past three decades on the basis that this expansion was self funding via student fees and loans. Of course many of those taking out such loans will either emigrate ( some folks always do) or in many more cases just not earn enough to have to repay and so, in the end, it is the taxpayer who will pick up the tab for this massive default.
We have thus created a system which lefty academics will fight tooth and nail to defend whereby not very bright folks go to bogus new Universities to learn not a lot and to have their tiny brains polluted with lefty groupthink by an academic establishment will will not tolerate any dissent from what it deems to be the truth.
You would have more chance of a fair debate on cultural diversity with a team from the Spanish Inquisition than you would have on discussing in a balanced matter: global warming, changes to immigration policy, the benefits of capitalism, the right of Israel to exist or the merits or otherwse of the EU on a campus in Britain in 2016. If you are a student or indeed lecturer reading this, you can go to Google to discover what the Spanish Inquisition was.
And as a bonus the expansion of all this nonsense is anything but self funding. At some point that will become clear. You the taxpayer are paying for this totalitarianism and excercise in futility. Are you sure that it is worth it?
The BBC is creaming itself with "news" that almost three million of our fellow citizens have signed a petition calling for a re-run of the EU referendum. I am told this shows that the nation is having second thoughts. Really? It makes me think that many of us are incapable of sensible thought at all.
It seems apparent that many of the names are bogus but I am happy to accept that a couple of million of folks who are eligible to vote want us to have to vote again because we voted the "wrong way". But are these two million "having second thoughts?" One suspects that they were "remainers" before and are "remainers" now. Nothing has changed it is just that they refuse to accept the popular will.
In covering this sad episode the BBC interviewed one signatory, a middle class young lady who espoused that those voting for Brexit just did not understand what it meant. That is why we must vote again. And that is one argument put by posh middle class kids who have not seen their jobs destroyed by the EU as have the fishermen or suffered downward pressure on wages thanks to migration as have the working classes or seen pressure on health and state schooling as have folks in the Grim North. For the posh middle class kids it is simple: Brexit voters were thick. Or racist. Or both. So lets have a new vote and keep voting till they get it.
Others argue that not enough people voted. The petition says that you should not accept change unless 60% vote for it and 75% of all voters vote. So by this curious take on democracy where you can get to decide policy by winning just 40.1% of the vote one is guaranteed inertia on all matters. Such a distorted poisonous version of democracy would have allowed recidivists in Parliament to delay abolishing the death penalty, decriminalising homosexuality and keeping Britain illiberal for longer in so many unpleasant ways. Is inertia always so cool young folks?
As for the 75% turnout, the referendum say the highest turnout in any national contest (on an old electoral roll since 1992 and more votes cast than in any national contest ever. If that is not democratic nothing is.
The reality is that had the vote been to Remain by even one vote on a turnout of just 30% this petition would not have started. It is nothing more than a long list of names which are either bogus or are of millions of folks who are elitist patronising snobs who simply cannot accept what democracy means.
It is a roll call of shame.
PS. I am now off to start a petition saying that own goals scored by Northern Ireland should not count and therefor post match we can change the rules and force a re-run of the Wales game on Thursday. can the three million sign up quickly surely you know that it makes sense?
But many leave campaigners are more honest and open that this vote is significant because it's the "last chance that Britons will have to decide the future of Britain". By Britons, they mean people that are ethnically, well, mostly English. Immigration has and will change the face of the UK. Many, especially older white men, are uncomfortable with that. If anything, that is the honest, straight up choice in this vote. Is England for the English? An ethnic state? Or is England part of the UK, a modern civic nation that embraces Europeans, and people of any background that choose to live by our laws?
This is partly why, while not all Brexiters are racists, all racists are Brexiters.
Are you horrified? I am. There is absolutely no evidence for any of the claims. The last line is laughable. If the polls are correct then the result will be 47-53% either way. Is Avraaz saying that not one racist is voting Remain? Yes that is what it is saying. And is it saying that most of those who are voting Leave ( "not all" implies most" are racist? That is to say at least 26% of the population? That is indeed what it is saying.
The message here is clear. If you vote Brexit tomorrow you must be a racist. This is just loathsome smearing from among the first groups to use the dead body of Jo Cox to smear Brexit. I support may of the liberal aims of Avraaz - which is why I am on its mailing list - but its recent mailings show that the folks that run this grouping are just loathsome and vile.
With the polls shifting in the last day or so towards Leave this obscene slur on more than a quarter of the British population is also a sign of real panic in Project Smear.
Baroness Warsi is an unelected Tory politician with a track record of dodgy business dealings who says the most appalling things to gain publicity. Today she has announced that she is leaving the "Leave" campaign on Brexit and joining "Remain" because of all the racism, xenophobia and bigotry of folks like Priti patel and Gisela Stuart. The BBC laps it up as a major blow for Brexit. The only problem is that the silly cow Warsi never actually joined the Leave campaign.
Please don't let that stop Project Fear treating this as news but it is all bogus. On twitter the derision is palpable. Among the best tweets are:
BREXIT 23.06.2016 @OffencePolice 2h2 hours ago Baroness Warsi has also announced she has asked Claudio Ranieri for a transfer from Leicester City, where she was last year's star striker Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 2h2 hours ago BREAKING: Baroness Warsi has announced that she will no longer be headlining at Glastonbury. Raheem Kassam @RaheemKassam 2h2 hours ago BREAKING: Baroness Warsi is set to give a lecture on what it was like to be the first man on the moon Julia Hartley-Brewer @JuliaHB1 2h2 hours ago BREAKING: Baroness Warsi announces that she will no longer be competing for Team GB in the 100metre sprint at the Rio Olympics Marcher Lord @MarcherLord1 32m32 minutes ago Using Baroness Warsi's logic, I have just emailed Warren Gatland to let him know that I've now officially retired from international rugby Ken Sampson @sampson_ken 5m5 minutes ago @StrongerIn Breaking news - Baroness Warsi has just announced she is leaving the Labour Party and becoming a Tory.
But watch the BBC, the Guardian, lyin' David Cameron et all treat this is major news. The narrative of the last few days from Project Fear will be Brexit, racist, don't talk about immigration, Jo Cox dedicated campaigner for the EU, the politics of hate, right wing murderers, etc.
They lost the argument but I fear they are winning the smears.
Sadly here in the most excellent Melitsina Village hotel here in Kardamili the only English language channel we can get is the BBC World News Channel. It is Pravda at its best. The agenda is clear: Trump = evil racist, Brexit - evil supported by racists, Tories - evil racists who hate the NHS, all of the NHS, EU, crooked Hillary = perfect. Once you understand that all reporting has to fit that narrative watching becomes easy and your anger at having to pay for this crap with your taxes sort of subsides.
And thus we flicked channels and saw a BBC chappie called Sean with a panel of four folks discussing Brexit. As far as I could make out it was two yanks and two Europeans. It did not long for me to realise what this panel debate was about. It was not about whether Brexit was good or bad. All four guests and the host agreed that Brexit would be a disaster.
I think it is actually a game called BBC Bingo/ two minutes without hesitation. The idea is to see which of the guests or indeed the host, can use the most words like Trump, racists and Boris Johnson in a negative sense and immigration, Clinton and the Labour Party in a positive sense all in one sentence.
Once you understand that it is a sort of game show your anger as a taxpayer and license fee payer subsides. Surely after the fall of the iron curtain no country in Europe would consider extracting money from its citizens to fund such blatant propaganda while pretending it was news would it?
In today's Mail on Sunday journalist Simon Walters produced what, he terms, a "candid" exclusive interview with Dodgy Dave Cameron in which lyin' Dave says absolutelty nothing new at all. But it is the front page splash from Mr Walters that shames his paper and shows that a panicking Remain Campaign will stoop to anything. The Mail claims Vote Leave has been "infiltrated" by Nazis.
Infiltration has a clear meaning in British politics. It means gaining membership in an organised and covert manner with a view to securing power. The Militant Tendency infiltrated Labour. On the other hand the Mail has manged to provide evidence that exactly seven nazis are handing out flyers for Vote Leave. it tops this up with a few quotes from a racist online chat room from Nazis who support Brexit.
I do not doubt for a second that the seven folk mentioned are loathsome racist and jew hating pigs. They are scum but to say that them handing out flyers, not setting policy, organising a campaign or anything close to having any power, just handing out leaflets is evidence of infiltration is laughable.
Vote Leave like Remain is a cross party group. I am sure that if you wanted to you could dig out some fairly unsavoury chaps in Remain. You might also note that the Jew hating Al-Qaeda sympathising nutters of Respect are supporting Vote Leave. I'm pretty sure that one could find evidence of at least eight George Galloway diehards handing out flyers for Vote Leave. But they are not infiltrating either, Vote Leave is not a party, it will never gain power, but the Mail knows all that but runs the story anyway.
I note that Vote Leave has 51,000 followers on twitter, I am not sure how many folks have signed up to assist it but it is in the tends of thousands. And the Mail thinks that finding seven Nazis among those tens of thousands of supporters is worthy of a front page splash on "infiltration?"
Where did Mr Walters get his "evidence" and photos from, I wonder? Might running this smear just be the quid pro quo for getting that exclusive "candid" interview with Dodgy Dave? Of course it is. Let the Mail deny that it received any assistance from folks linked to Project Fear with this disgusting piece of hatchet journalism. It won't as it can't.
Cameron, having studied philosophy at Oxford, knows full well the logical flaw in the following sentence: "some frogs have red spots, this animal has red spots so he must be a frog". Just because a handful of Nazis support Brexit it does not mean that all Brexit supporters are Nazis. But the dog whistle use of the word "infiltration" is designed to smear by association.
This article a sign of utter desperation by Dodgy Dave and Project Fear. They now lag in the polls, Vote Leave has momentum and is surging, Boris & Priti Patel knocked them for six on immigration last week and while Michael Gove had a great Sky interview on Friday, Cameron crashed and burned. Project Fear is losing the argument on sovereignty, it is not trusted by anyone, it has lost the immigration debate and is slipping on the economy as folks realise that blaming Brexit for everything is nonsense. Cameron and his colleagues are now realising that they could actually lose on June 23 and so they rope in a corrupt member of the media "in-crowd" to run the lowest and most despicable of hatchet jobs.
When Project Fear sinks to this level, one hopes that the electorate will react by rejecting all that it stands for on principle. For this smear job is a tacit acceptance that it has now lost all the real arguments.
In today's Daily Telegraph the columnist Allison Pearson describes how when debating Brexit with multi-millionaire PR man Roland Rudd (brother of dimwit cabinet minister Amber) she was told that "Allison does not want any immigrants coming to this country". The traditional retort to those to question any aspect of immigration policy is "you're racist"
As Pearson points out, the Rudds were kids of a millionaire stockbroker and then went to posh public school and Oxford (just like Dodgy Dave Cameron himself). They have never experienced the downside of immigration: downward pressure on wages for lower earners and problems getting access to schools and healthcare in certain areas or pressure on the housing list. For them as affluent employers and consumers immigration is all upside. And thus the rich and middle classes have for years branded anyone who queried our policies as racist. The most excellent Priti Patel, who also thinks current policies are crackers, came up with the same analysis.I guess Priti is a racist too. Heck so many of us who didn't grow up in millionaire households seem to be racists these days.
And that matters in terms of Brexit at two levels. Firstly there is the Turkey issue. It will join the EU at some stage. And if we are in then its 75 million punters plus a few million refugees now living in Turkey all have the right to come to the UK and polls suggest that, understandably, many want to. Dodgy Dave says this will never happen so here is a quiz question for you. Who said:
"I will remain your strongest possible advocate of EU membership , together I want to help Turkey pave the road from Ankara to Brussels."
Yes it was 2010 and Dodgy Dave Cameron himself. Turkey will join one day and those who want us to stay in the EU just do not explain how we will handle this. Oh and Albania, Macedonia and Montenegro will also be joining soon but I guess the Albanians who pitch up will not be moving to the neighbourhoods where folks like Cameron or the Rudds live, nor will their kids try to get into the sort of schools where little Camerons or Rudds are educated meaning that the little Camerons and Rudds end up at 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice academies.
Then there is the proposal from the leavers that Britain apply an Australian style points system to ensure we admit only those we want to admit from wherever in the world rather than the current system of points for non Europeans (the darkies) and free access for Europeans (the whities). Those in Project Fear started by saying that the proposal articulated by Boris (half Turkish, born in the USA), Gove and Priti Patel was a touch racist implying it was certain to reduce numbers. At the same time they said, look at Australia it will increase immigration! Talk about having your cake and eating it.
Australia is a vast continent with just 22 million citizens so it needs more folks. But its system allows it to decide exactly who it wants and also to control the flow. If it wanted to slash immigration it just ups the points needed and vice versa. The key point here is that Australia gets to decide exactly how many folks it admits and what skills they must have and it does it in a 100% colour blind manner, there are no bonus points for being an Aryan from Europe unlike our own racist system.
My own solution is of course totally free movement but zero state benefits for anyone (including native Brits) until they have paid five years of taxes. But that will not happen given the reluctance of the political classes to really tackle the welfare culture.
As a half way house Aussie points is clearly less racist and fairer and better for Britain than the current EU mess. There is no argument against it so elitists such as the PR supremo Roland Rat must merely resort to the smear of "racism" or the patent lie that Aussie Points will lead to more immigration. Even folks like Rat and his ghastly sister Amber must be aware that they are talking utter rubbish. On this matter, camp Brexit has won the debate and perhaps now the referendum might go the right way. I am starting to hope again.
Around 40,000 kids are not going to school today because their stupid left wing parents have instructed them to go on strike. The overpaid and lazy teachers, no doubt delighted that they have even less work to do as they look forward to their ten week summer hols, support the strike. Who suffers from #Kidsstrike3rdMay and why?
Of course it is the kids who suffer since they have one day less of being taught all about global warming killing all the polar bears and why we must stay in the European Union because its racist not to do so, as well as a few minutes of learning the three Rs.
If its not bad enough that your parents read the Guardian and fill your impressionable young minds with crap at home, now these poor souls are also being deprived of what passes for a State education as well.
Apparently the strike is in protest at the imposition of new SAT tests by the wicked Tories which, it is claimed, are stressing out the youth of today. The evil Tories have spent too much time listening to evil capitalist employers complaining about how younger folk cant read and write and not enough time noticing how everyone gets 27 A*s at GCSE. And so they want more tests for the kids which is stressing out the poor lambs as well as the over-stressed and underpaid teachers.
Of course it is all the fault of Thatcher. Or perhaps these days lefties just blame it all on the Jews. Whatever.... as a rule of thumb if a Guardian reading teacher tells you something is good you just know that it is very bad indeed.
Listening to beltway liberal Kylie Morris on C4 or to the BBC's legion of taxpayer funded reporters it is clear that black Americans hate Donald Trump because he is a racist. That is a given right? No disputes it is what David Cameron might term a fact. Er... don't tell Kylie but it is not actually what the ard data demonstrates. Kylie's telling porkies again.
The most recent polls of black Americans asking them how they would vote in a Trump vs the loathsome Clinton race have The Donald ranging at about 10% wich is dire. But then again while blacks used to vote Republican in droves as it was the GOP that abolished slavery, since the 1960s and civil rights they have been solidly Democrat. They hate ALL Republicans.
Nixon got 35% of the non white vote in 1960 but since then the GOP candidate has - according to Gallup - polled:
6% Goldwater 1964 12% Nixon 1968 13% Nixon 1972 15% Ford 1976 10% Reagan 1980 13% Reagan 1984 18% Bush 1988 11% Bush 1992 12% Dole 1996
At this point Gallup seperates hispanics and blacks and other non whites and it is clear that the GOP does a lot worse among black voters than among other non whites ( for instance in 2004 polling 7% among blacks and 22% among other non whites to give an overall non-white 17% ) and that implies that the actual black vote since 1960 - other than in 1988 - has been consistently at 10% or below even when the GOP has won the battle for the White House. And so we go on..
3% Bush JNR 2000 7% Bush JNR 2004 1% McCain 2008 5% Romney 2012
Okay in 2008 and 2012 the Dems fielded a black candidate and that may partially explain why the GOP failed so badly in those years although the fact that McCain and Romney were also totally useless might also have had something to do with it. Of course McCain and Mitt are now telling Republicans they cannot select racist Trump as he will lose the black vote so ensuring a Democrat General Election win. Whatever.
But the stand out points are clear. Firstly blacks just dont like the Republicans. But secondly The Donald could quite possibly be the most popular Republican among black voters in 65 years despite Kylie et al saying that as a vile racist he cannot win the General Election in part because blacks will not vote for him.
All the evidence is that Trump would probably poll more black votes than any Republican since Nixon bac in 1960, bar the out-rider that is Bush in 1988. Since an awful lot of GOP candidates have won the race to the West Wing despite doing less well than "racist" Donald among the blacks, the beltway liberal media and the Country Club GOP establisment are talking patent nonsense either because they are too lazy to look at real data or because they opt to ignore it, since it does not fit their narrative.
Now when will Kylie and the BBC start reporting real balanced data do you think?
It was less than 24 hours after the Brussels attacks when the Mrs and I arrived at Gawtck at 4.30 AM. Given the images we had seen on our TV screens for almost the entire previous day, being in the departure lounge of an international airport was not exactly our preferred location but needs must.
As we wandered towards the terminal a guy rushed past us in a real hurry shouting loudly down his cell phone in arabic. I gave a bit of a double take and was glad he was rushing away from me. Is that racist? I am terribly sorry if admitting my feelings offends any arab speaking readers. But as Westerner I right now feel kind of offended - not to say a it scared -by yet again seeing my fellow Europeans yet again butchered by folks who speak arabic.
If I was a Guardian journalist - something we can say that will never be the case - I would probably get sacked for admitting to my feelings. But I bet that though the DNA of a lefty is embedded with guilt and political correctness - they too now feel scared in the same way I do. It is just that they don't dare admit to it.
After our encounter with our arabic speaking pal I could not get the other side of security quick enough. The Mrs wanted to go to the loo. Nope. Don't you dare. Think of dry deserts darling, lets just get through passport control to a safer haven.
Of course you are not utterly safe anywhere. But is it really offensive to say that I'd rather be in an area where all bags have been scanned and passports chequed or in an area where nothing has been chequed and a bloke is rushing past me screaming arabic into his cell phone?
I listen to BBC Radio 4 which seems to be about twenty minutes behind twitter in reporting the latest attacks in Brussels. They are co-ordinated ISIS style. They come a few days after the arrest of the the most wanted man in Europe, an ISIS terrorist. Shouts in arabic were heard before the airport blast which took place next to the American Airlines desk. And naturally the BBC is reluctant to speculate about who might be responsible. Hmmmm let me have a guess?
Maybe it is the wicked Jews from Israel whom the BBC blames for most bad things in the Middle East? Or perhaps it was the Kurds? It is surely only a matter of time before the EU's new best friend, the fascist leader of Turkey, President Erdogan, blames our allies the brave Kurds for this atrocity? What, you think it might be ISIS? So do I. But it has not crossed anyone's mind at the BBC. That would, presumably, be racist.
Finally, 80 minutes into the coverage someone has dared meantion the ISIS word. Well done Frank Gardener.
Old fool Ken Clarke was on the show telling lies about Iain Duncan Smith. Perhaps he might have been asked to comment on the claims made by his side in the Brexit debate that Britain was safer from terrorist attack as a member of the EU. As the Parisians already know it does not always feel exactly that way does it?
Gosh the lefty media just does not know to play this one. A white college educated liberal attended a Donald Trump rally dressed in a Klu Klux Klan hood yesterday and endeavoured to disrupt the event, making it clear that he thinks The Donald is a racist. A black supporter of Donald Trump then beat him up before the cops pulled both men away in cuffs.
The liberal media is confused because it has been telling us for ages that all blacks hate Trump for being a racist. It also tells us that white folks who dress up in KKK hoods are bad news. And that it supports free speech.
So how does it spin this particular event? We conservatives hae no need to spin. we have said for ages that plenty of blacks and hispanics have lived the American dream and thus vote for the GOP and will vote for Trump. It is only liberals who assume in their patronising way that being well off or having drive is the preserve of the whites. And of course it is the left that thinks free speech is only for those they agree with. We on the right know free speech is for all. So we have no need to spin.
But for the left, just how do you spin this event?
Meanwhile I hope that the Trump supporter rightly observes that folks dressing up in Klan outfits is offensive to him as an African American and that in kicking the shit out of the idiot he was merely making amends for 200 years of oppression and racism. How was he to know that the chap underneath the outfit was not a racist?
We can safely say that I will never win an Oscar but just in case I do I have penned my winning speech already. It is not long but I think captures all the points one needs to make.
I thank you all most sincerely in selecting me from this all white short list. I am not worthy and have only won becuase you are all racists. None the less I am glad that you have jetted in in your private planes from around the world. While we sit here let's not forget the really important issues outside like combating global warming.
Why I wonder were there no woman nominated as best actor? You are not only racists you are all sexists too. And though only 5% of the population is gay, in this room where at least 10% of the audience is out - cue brief short joke about Tom Cruise - we cannot regard this as a truly progressive industry until LGBT actors and actresses are fairly represented.
I dedicate this award to the migrants at Calais, Donald Trump would not do that because he is a fascist.
Cue: enormous gales of laughter and massie applause from an audience who think Calais is a small town in Dixie.
God bless America, unless you: live in the flyover states/like stock car racing/listen to Country music/believe in God/dont burst out laughing whenever anyone says Donald Trump is a fascist/vote Republican
Two days before the Nevada primary Kylie filed a long piece on how hispanics voters in Nevada were shunning Trump. After searching really hard all day Kylie managed to find just one Latino voter who was voting for Trump, a Vietnam vet who Kylie was thus able to expose as a weirdo. In Kylie world, latinos shared her view that Trump was a racist and none were backing him.
Now the Nevada results are in. Trump got 44% while his two closest rivals - both half Cuban - got 24.5% (Rubio) and 22% (Cruz). That was among all Republican voters. Among hispanics Trump scored 44%, Rubio 29% and Cruz 18% which means that the supposed racist scored as well among hispanics as among white voters securing almost 1 in 2 Hispanic Republicans. Cruz appears to be even less liked by hispanics than he is by whites. Maybe he is half racist? Kylie can you explain?
Of course Kylie boasts that she lives inside the Beltway and thus her Washington liberal elite narrative is that all hispanics are poor brown folks who think Republicans generally are racist and so are default Democrats.
The reality is that large numbers of Latinos have ignored Democrats who urge them to portray themselves as victims of racism and give up and have instead worked hard, lived the Americam dream and thus, as affluent, tax-paying, God fearing folks are now registered Republicans and are are very open indeed to the Trump message.
Kylie in her patronising liberal way just assumed that brown folks would be poor. She did not seek out any rich latinos of whom there are many. And that is why British viewers were told that it was impossible to find any Latinos voting for the racist Trump when in fact the Trumpster stormed the Latino vote.
At what point will Channel 4 News accept that whilst Kylie's take on life might fit in well with their snearing liberal values, her failure to report anything like the truth is just getting a tad too obvious and that she needs to be replaced by someone marginally less stupid?
We, or at least our leaders have blood on our hands. We support the House of Saud which in turn commits wholesale human rights abuses, war crimes, supports terrorists, exports extremism and treats migrant workers in an overtly racist way, as slaves with no rights. Yet David Cameron is taking British support to new levels. There is a better way.
I was chatting to a chap in the grim North today. Snow was falling and he said that at 7 AM this morning with less than an inch of global warming on the ground the kids had been texted: School is closed. We reflected how life had changed.
Even during the winter of 1979, I cannot remember Warwick School for Boys shutting down. When we are at the junior school snow meant that Headmaster Jack Marshall would allow us to wear long trousers rather than our normal shorts. It could have been minus 5 but if there was no snow, it was shorts as normal for the younger boys.
If the rugby pitches were covered in snow we played anyway. Snow is soft. When snow turned to ice it was a freezing cross country run instead. Boy did I hate that.
The point is that the school never closed. And snow meant snowballs which is not quite the harmless game it sounds. The sixth form would amass on the centre of a rugby pitch and the rest of the school would advance from a car park to throw snow balls. And then in snatch parties, as in the army, the brutes would rush out and try to catch an advancing “nipper” who would promptly find himself having snow shoved up his shirt and down his trousers, returning to his comrades a bedraggled mess.
It was a brutal game a bit like a winter version of British Bulldog a game which is I am sure now banned for being both racist and also a clear breach of Health and Safety rules. But it was a game everyone always looked forward to.
Just occasionally snow would mean that some of us got a day off. We lived in a little village called Harbury and to get down to Warwick (15 minutes full pelt downhill in the summer on a bicycle) could be dangerous at the height of winter. So just occasionally those boys living in Harbury (myself, Bunting M, Ellis D, Millington S, Smith G and Garman J – how on earth do I remember this nonsense) would not be able to get to go to school. That meant a day sledging down Ufton Hill.
I compare these vague memories of childhood with today. If there is a couple of millimetres of snow The Mrs gets a text from her University saying that she has the day off, the Schools are all closed and education stops. I might sound like a grumpy old man but surely are we not just a bunch of Jessies these days?
Imagine what would happen if Israel beheaded a woman for whatever crime within sight of the Wailing Wall? There would be mass demonstrations, the Guardian would lead a media campaign demanding sanctions and worse. This would be universally condemned by Western leaders and the state of Israel would be – rightly – slated as Neanderthal and barbaric. Luckily those wicked Jews don’t do that sort of thing.
But yesterday the Saudi’s beheaded a woman - Lalia Bint Abdul Muttablib Basim - in Mecca. Video footage now on the internet shows her screaming her innocence as she is dragged down the street in the holy City of Mecca. It takes three blows with aa sword to decapitate her. This is the tenth beheading in Saudi Arabia this year. Saudi's rarely get executed by thestate. This woman was Burmese. It is usually Asians who get killed in this way for the Saudi's are nothing if not utterly racist.
The Saudi regime is a monstrous, evil, backward kleptocracy. But Saudi is drowning in oil so our leaders kowtow to its vile leaders and sell them guns and planes. The liberal left might express outrage but it is almost en passant. Just imagine what they would do and say if it was the evil Jews doing this by the Wailing Wall?
Someone using an anonymous name and made up email keeps on trying to post comments on this website. The content is the same – defamatory and untrue comments about me and my business interests followed by the assertion that I am a “dirty jippo” (sic)
I make an effort to shower once a day and am not of Romany extraction and I am afraid to say that I know no gypsies. When I was a child my parents used to let a couple of hippies called Rob and Maggie camp in our field and so I have taken the reins of a horse drawn gypsy wagon. But that is the closest I have got.
I have no problems with gypsies. Nor with free speech. If this coward wants to go post racist and defamatory comments (anonymously) there are plenty of places to do it. Hitler was not keen on gypsies so maybe he should try a white supremacist site somewhere?
But as a publisher I am not obliged to provide this bigot or any other bigot with a platform. As such this cretin can keep submitting untrue, defamatory and racist comments but he is mistaken if he thinks I shall approve any of them.
— Tom Winnifrith
Register here for The Tomograph
Tom's newsletter with original articles and a free share tip of the week, not found on this website.